PILB - Private Investigators Licensing Board Surveillance and Evidence Collection Questions and Answers — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A private investigator in Nevada is conducting surveillance on an individual for an insurance fraud case. From a public sidewalk, the investigator records the individual carrying heavy bags of groceries from their car to their house. The individual has claimed a debilitating back injury. Which of the following is true regarding the video evidence?
- The evidence is inadmissible because it violates the subject's right to privacy.
- The evidence is likely admissible because it was obtained from a public place where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. (Correct answer)
- The evidence is only admissible if the investigator first announced their presence to the subject.
- The evidence is automatically excluded because surveillance is considered entrapment in Nevada.
Correct answer: The evidence is likely admissible because it was obtained from a public place where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
In Nevada, as in most jurisdictions, evidence gathered by a private investigator in a public place is generally admissible in court. Individuals do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they are in public view. Therefore, taking photos or videos from a public street or sidewalk is a legal and standard practice for surveillance.
Question 2: To ensure evidence is admissible in court, a private investigator must meticulously document its handling from collection to presentation. What is this chronological documentation trail called?
- Evidence Log
- Investigative Summary
- Chain of Custody (Correct answer)
- Case File Index
Correct answer: Chain of Custody
The Chain of Custody is the critical, documented record of the sequence of custody, control, transfer, analysis, and disposition of physical or electronic evidence. Maintaining a proper chain of custody is essential to prove the integrity of the evidence and prevent it from being challenged as tampered or contaminated in court.
Question 3: A private investigator is hired to gather information about a person's financial assets. The investigator calls the subject's bank, impersonates the subject using their known personal information, and successfully obtains bank account balances. This technique is known as pretexting. According to federal law, what is the legality of this action?
- It is a legal and accepted method for asset investigation.
- It is legal only with a notarized authorization from the client.
- It is illegal under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. (Correct answer)
- It is only illegal if the information is used in a criminal, not civil, case.
Correct answer: It is illegal under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), a federal law enacted in 1999, specifically makes it illegal to use false pretenses (pretexting) to obtain someone's financial information from a bank or financial institution. Private investigators must abide by this law, and evidence obtained in violation of it is illegal and inadmissible.
Question 4: Which of the following surveillance activities would most likely constitute an illegal invasion of privacy for a private investigator in Nevada?
- Following a subject's vehicle on public roads.
- Observing a subject's activities in a public park.
- Using a telephoto lens to photograph a subject through their living room window from another property without permission. (Correct answer)
- Recording a subject's public posts on a social media platform.
Correct answer: Using a telephoto lens to photograph a subject through their living room window from another property without permission.
Entering private property without permission to spy on someone inside their home is a violation of their reasonable expectation of privacy and may constitute trespassing and illegal peering under Nevada law (NRS 200.603). While surveillance in public places is generally permissible, it cannot extend to surreptitious observation into private dwellings where a high expectation of privacy exists.
Question 5: During a contentious child custody investigation, a private investigator records a conversation between the subject and another person while they are dining on the outdoor patio of a crowded restaurant. Under what general principle is this recording likely to be considered legally obtained evidence?
- The one-party consent rule.
- The lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public setting. (Correct answer)
- The investigator's status as a licensed professional.
- The relevance of the conversation to the case.
Correct answer: The lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public setting.
Conversations held in a public place, such as a crowded restaurant patio, where others can easily overhear, generally do not carry a reasonable expectation of privacy. Therefore, a private investigator recording what they can plainly hear in such a setting is typically not an illegal interception of communication, and the evidence would likely be admissible.
Question 6: According to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 648, which of the following activities falls under the definition of a private investigator's work and requires a PILB license?
- Accessing exclusively public records for a client.
- Securing evidence to be used before a court or investigating committee. (Correct answer)
- Serving legal documents on behalf of an attorney.
- Providing uniformed guard services to protect property.
Correct answer: Securing evidence to be used before a court or investigating committee.
NRS 648.012 explicitly defines a "Private investigator" as a person who, for consideration, engages in the business of... "Securing evidence to be used before any court, board, officer or investigating committee." The other options describe activities that either do not require a PI license (accessing public records) or fall under different license categories like Process Server or Private Patrol Officer.
PILB - Private Investigators Licensing Board Surveillance and Evidence Collection Questions and Answers
A private investigator in Nevada is conducting surveillance on an individual for an insurance fraud case.
From a public sidewalk, the investigator records the individual carrying heavy bags of groceries from their car to their house.
The individual has claimed a debilitating back injury.
Which of the following is true regarding the video evidence?