CIPLAN

3.9.17
Determine investigative direction:
In determining the investigative direction, the
evidence matrix is recommended to be used to
facilitate planning, set the direction and focus of an
investigation, use as an adjudication tool for the
sufficiency of evidence and review processes as
shown below.
 Elements/Facts in
Allegation Crimes Avenues of Inquiry
Issue
A general statement List all possible List the elements of How the elements of the
outlining the Crime and the crimes that can crimes together crime are to be satisfied
aim of the investigation. be gleaned with any relevant
The statement need not be from the issues that may
in technical terms, so long circumstances. affect the
as it is clear and easily investigation
understood. This statement
will set the parameters of
the investigation
Ex: at about 9:00 AM Oct Ex. Ex. Element 1: Ex. Element 1:
13, 2010 the wife of Cong. Art. 248 of • Intent to kill • Deploy SOCO
Mandatu and twenty (20) of RPC (Murder) • Treachery • Interview/ secure
her political allies and 35 • Superior strength testimony of witnesses
media personalities were PD 1866 as • Premeditation • Search Warrants
found dead at Sharif Uwak, amended by • Cruelty • Crime Laboratory
Maguindanao allegedly due RA 8294
Element 2: Elements 2:
to multiple gunshot Omnibus • Legal search and
• Unlawful
wounds. Election Code seizures
• Possession of
firearm and • FEO certification
explosives Elements 3
• COMELEC
Element 3: certification
• Election period
Standard Tactical Plan Sample:
I. SITUATION

a. Case to be filed – Two (2) Counts of Murder Special Complex Crime of

Kidnapping with Homicide.
b. TDPO – OOA 2A.M. of Oct. 30, 2016 at Brgy. Tria, San Pedro City, Nueva
Ecija.
c. Name of Victims – couple identified as Juan Dela Cruz and Juana Dela Cruz y
Al Mario.
d. Suspects – eight unidentified men armed with long firearms, wearing
camouflage pants, black sweatshirts, bonnets and with ammo suspenders.
e. Resources – Budget shall be derived from the contingency fund of the Office.
f. Agencies involved – PNP, CHR, DOJ, LGU’s, AFP

I. MISSION
To effectively and efficiently manage the investigation focusing on the
immediate identify of the eight (8) unidentified malefactors, determine their motive,
locate and apprehend them and provide evidence of their guilt and possible place
them behind the bar of justice.
III. Execution
Assignment Sheet
Operation: _______________ Prepared by: _____________________
Members Task Call Sign Commo Equip’t Special Note
PSSUPT Juan Task Group Eagle1 Radio Ch1 TG Commander
Dela Cruz Cmdr Mobile: Coordination with the
123456 NPS
PCI PEDRO AL Deputy TG Eagle2 Radio Ch1 OIC for investigation
MARIO Cmdr Mobile:
123477
IV. Contingency
a. Funds – budget shall be immediately requested and allocated from the LGU
and PNP Headquarters.
b. Manpower – augmented by the AFP and the PNP SAF in the manhunt
operation of the alleged members of the CTs
c. Mobility – Ensure that all available transportation equipment are in place and
ready for deployment
d. Rewards – reward motivates individual to provide information on the suspects.
V. Administration and Logistics
Tasking – Members of the SITG shall refer on the tasking directed by the TG
Cmdr and other collateral requirements shall be provided by the SITG.
VI. Command and Communication
(Refer to Case Organizational Structure)
Procedure: CASE REVIEW
No. Activity Yes No
DIDM recommended for NHQ level the Case Review
1 • DPRM issued appropriate order for the composition of the
review team and participants
C, RIDMD recommended for a regional level Case Review
2 • RPHRDD Admin Officers issued appropriate order for the
composition of the review team and participants
Review undertaken by:
3 • PROs for PPO/District level SITG
• NHQ-DIDM for PRO level SITG
Review conducted by:
• Around day seven (7) of an ongoing investigation
• Cases still under investigation after twenty eight (28) days
4 from the date of incident
• After inquest
• After completion of the investigation and before referral of
case to the Prosecutor’s Office
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No
Affidavits or other documents taken from witnesses
complainants were written in a local dialect not known to
5 any members of the Review Team
• Investigating unit/participants translated written
document to Tagalog or English language
Copies of the complete case folder forwarded to the review
team
6 • All members of the Review Team were provided with
their individual copy of the case folder at least three (3)
days before the scheduled review
Review Team conducted a pre-review before the actual
review in the absence of the participants
7 • Identify investigative opportunity that was overlooked
• Concentrated on the initial findings to be emphasize
during the actual case review
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No

Review Team required the investigating unit/participants to

8 submit additional documents which are necessary during
the actual review

PowerPoint presentation was prepared by the investigating

9
unit/participants

Before the start of the presentation of the case, the

participants:
10 • Introduce themselves
• Stated their positions held related to investigation and
since when did they acquire jurisdiction over the case

The Review Team:

• Introduce its members
11 • Purpose/rationale behind the case review for the
orientation and guidance of the participants
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No
PowerPoint presentation was rendered by the investigating
unit/participants and reflected the following:
12 • Background of the case
• Actions taken
• Progress of the investigation

Review Team must check the completeness of the case

folder like:
• Incident Report Form (IRF)
• Complaint sheet
• Sworn statement of complainant
• Sworn statement of witnesses
13
• Summary of information
• Coordination
• Request and certificate from concerned agency/offices
• Initial report
• Booking/information sheet of suspect
• Photograph of suspect
Continuation from no.13:
No. Activity Yes No
• Composite sketch
• SOCO report
• Result of forensic examinations
• Crime scene photograph
• Photographs of victim
• Evidence recovered and seized
• Sketch of crime scene
• Timeline of incident
• Final investigation report

Review Team shall constructively evaluate the investigation

to ensure that:
• It conforms to existing policy, guidelines and procedures
14
• It is thorough
• It has been conducted with integrity and objectivity
• No investigative opportunities has been overlooked

• Review Team shall look at the case in an open mind and

15 in a constructive manner on how the investigation was
conducted
Procedure: CASE REVIEW
No. Activity Yes No
16 Organizational practice shall also be evaluated
17 Chain of custody of evidence strictly observed
Review Team considered carefully the circumstances of a
18 case
19 All investigative leads had been pursued
20 All possible motives were exploited
Review Team finds that certain policies and procedures
were not followed
21 • Investigators or Case Managers clarified the
circumstances why they were not observed
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No

Review Team looked at the three (3) identified main types

of weakness of the investigation:
• Identified actions, tasks or lines of inquiry that were not
undertaken but were identified by the review team as
requirements being a policy, guidelines, procedure and
good practice, or would have added value to that specific
investigation.

• Identified actions, tasks or lines of inquiry which were

22 undertaken but were considered to have been
detrimental in some way to the investigation or likewise
in contravention to existing policy, guidelines and
procedures.

• Identified actions, tasks or lines of inquiry which were

undertaken and were appropriate to the investigation,
but some aspect of the quality or the way in which the
task was undertaken, was considered to be inadequate.
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No

Review Team looked at the identified main types of

weakness of the investigation:
• Initial actions at the crime scene
• Information gathering
• Witness/suspect management
• Evidence management
• Submission
• Post-mortem
• Recording investigator’s decision
23 • Procedure and content
• Acquirement and storage
• Document management
• Action administration
• Staffing levels
• Availability of trained investigation team
• Internal communication
• External communication
• With victims family
• Communication with victims family
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No
Identify the causes of observed weaknesses
• Poor judgement
• Lack of knowledge
24
• Non-compliance with existing procedures
• Lack of resources
• Management style
25 Used the Checklist for Initial Action of First Responder
26 Used the Investigators Checklist
27 Used the checklist of procedure at the crime scene
Used checklist for conduct of investigation of crimes of
28 violence
29 Used checklist for the conduct of interview
30 Used checklist on the conduct of profiling
31 Used checklist in the conduct of surveillance operation
32 Secretariat recorded the minutes of the case review
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No
33 Case review supports an open, just and learning culture
Investigators were not intimidated, embarrassed and
34
undermined
Review Team provided copies of the initial findings and
35 recommendations to the participants
Review Team included the following as part of the case
review report:
• Findings/Minutes
36 • Specific case recommendation
• Observed best practices
• Activity photos
• Attendance sheet

Reflected what investigative opportunities were actually

37 scrutinized
Identified other investigative opportunities newly discovered
38 which need follow-up
Procedure:
No. Activity Yes No
RIDMD monitored the compliance on all recommendations
made during the Case Review
39
• All cases were reviewed based on the existing standards
set forth in this SOP
40 Result of Case Review was forwarded to DIDM
Result of Case Review does not conform with the SOP
• DIDM may conduct a case review
41 • Direct PRO to conduct another Case Review to ensure
that the investigative opportunities that might have been
overlooked will be undertaken
 Case Review Procedure:
Ongoing investigation – subject to some form of oversight

Review commissioned and review team selected

Initial contact between investigating and review teams, latter get ‘up to speed’
on Investigation

Focus of review decided, data collection and analysis conducted. Ongoing

contact and exchange

Report constructed and findings disseminated

Findings acted upon as appropriate

 CASE REVIEW REPORT
Date: December 7, 2014
Time: 9:20 AM
Venue: EPJUST Office REVIEW TEAM
Rank and Name Designation Unit Remarks
PSSUPT Christopher DDO CIDG Present
Laxa

PCINSP Henry HS, TFU DIDM Present

Libay
PCINSP Rodolfo C, WAISS-IND CIDG Present
Delos Reyes
PCINSP Efren Deputy IND CIDG Present
Fernandez
PCINSP Eder C, TS – SIDD DIDM Present
Collantes
PSINSP Ronald Deputy HS, TFU DIDM Present
Almirol
PSINSP Al LO, DIDM/TFU LS Present
  Participants
Rank and Designation Unit Contact No Remarks
Name
PO3 Christian Detective TF USIG 7230401loc 3650 Present
Luzon

PO3 Melvin Investigator TF USIG 7230401loc 3650 Present

Patrick Mateo

PO3 Maricon Cruz Investigator TF USIG 7230401loc 3650 Present

PO3 Ma Cecilia Investigator TF USIG 7230401loc 3650 Present

del Mundo

PO2 Victor Diala Detective TF USIG 7230401loc 3650 Present

PO1 Raymond Investigator TF USIG 7230401loc 3650 Present

Sevilla
 Case Reviewed: Malowe Martinez
 Case File Index:

• Crime Committed :Murder

• Date of Incident :July 5, 2014
• Time of Incident:6:30 AM
• Place of Incident:Dumaguete City Neg. Or
• Name of Suspect : Danilo Pete
• Status of Case :Filed in Court
• IOC : SPO2 Abraham Garaono
 Findings/Minutes:
 Investigative manpower is sufficicent.

 Some documentation is the case folder is missing:

Timeline of the incident is missing: When did the first responder

arrive at the crime scene? What actions were undertaken?

 No photograph of the immediate surrounding : no specific

information describing the area to facilitate search for other
possible witnesses.

 No house-to-house canvassing operations to look for other

possible witnesses.

 What were the result of the ballistic examination? Any cross-

matching made on the recovered empty shell t other similar
incidents in the area through the Integrated Ballistic Identification
System (IBIS)?
 Any interview with “Betoy” (BJMP officer) who visited the
victim prior to the commission of the crime? Why?

 Perhaps “Betoy” could be the “spotter” who confirmed the

presence of the victim?

 What was the purpose of his visit?

 Betoy is a distant relative of the victim.

 Betoy was asking the victim for assistance to ask the mayor
to for help in his problem with the local electric company.

 Perpetrator is believed to a be a non-resident of the area:

-Not familiar with the environment.
Any contact with provincial prosecutors? –Yes
-Victim was a former NPA member and had lot of cases filed
against him.

 Where was the suspect on 5 July 2014 since he denied being at

the crime scene. This question was not asked from the suspect.

 Did you make any search on the suspect’s house? Did you
recover any cellphone, etc?

 A grenade was thrown at the house of the victim prior to the

shooting incident, but there was no investigation conducted.

 There seems to be a connection between the grenade throwing

and the shooting incidents.

 The grenade throwing happened in another municipality.

 Any description on the clothes worn by the perpetrator?

 Is it normal for the suspect to remove his helmet prior to

killing the victim?

 This kind of actuation is unusual which can be used as a

defense by the suspect in court.

 Have you tried to check the affiliations/connections of the

suspect?

 The suspect was described as having a “Police character”

 Have you tried to check with Firearms and Explosives

Office (FEO) if the suspect has a licensed firearm?

 - Yes, with licensed firearm

 Any flash alarms relayed to other units? – Yes (but not documented).

 Did SOCO process the crime scene? -Yes

 Are Bayan Muna members convinced that he was the suspect? – Yes

 Where is “Bread and Butter?” bakery located?

- In a residential area.

 Did you check for CCTV footage at the gasoline stations for any
video taken on the suspect and his vehicle?

- Yes, but the suspect cannot be identified and the vehicle appeared
to have no license plate.

- And the CCTV footage, showing that the vehicle passed 2 minutes
before the crime, was submitted to Crime Lab –The turn-over was not
properly documented.
 Have you tried to request the victim’s cellphone from his family
to check for any messages that could be useful in the on-
going investigation?

- The victim’s cellphone was turned-over by the victim’s wife to

Dumaguete City Police Station investigator and was forwarded to
7RCIDU for digital forensic examination.

- The chain of custody of evidence must always be observed.

Have you tried to determine the cellphone number of the suspect?

- Any request made with concerned telecommunications
companies pertaining to the location of the suspect’s cellphone
during the commission of the crime.

 What is the participation of the victim in various NPA activities

when he was still an active member?
 Was there any misunderstanding between the
victim and the former mayor?

To which local party was the victim

connected? Who are the identified members?
- Allegedly “Tibyong”.

 What are the efforts to identify the other

suspect? Statements should be done in
question and answer form (instead of
narrative form).
 SPECIFIC CASE RECOMMENDATIONS
 All actions taken/not taken should be documented in
detail (following the prescribed contents of case folder)
and included in the case folder to facilitate smooth turn-
over of cases to the succeeding investigator.

 Exerts more efforts in determining the series of events

that took place prior to the commission of the crime.

 Conduct house-to-house canvassing operations to look

for possible witnesses.

 Conduct ballistic cross-matching examination on the

recovered empty shells to other similar cases in the area
thru the Integrated Ballistic Identification System (IBIS).
 Profile the victim:

- What was the motive behind the killing? Political? Personal? What are the
criminal cases of the victim? Who were the complainants? Etc.

- Check victim’s cellphone for any valuable information.

- Determine the other candidates who ran for the same during the last
elections.

- Establish the political situation in the area.

 Profile the suspect: Establish the location of the suspect on July 5, 2014.

-Check with Firearms and Explosives Office (FEO) if the suspect has a
licensed firearm, and if so, conduct ballistic cross-matching examination on
the recovered empty shells and the ballistc record of the firearm thru IBIS.

- Check with LTO if suspect has a registered motorcyle.

 Profile all persons possibly involved in the case like Betoy
etc.

 Follow-up on the development of the investigation

regarding the grenade throwing incident.

 Follow-up the results of the ballistics and cross-matching

examination.

 Follow-up with the CIDG result of the digital forensic

conducted on the victim’s cellphone.

 Interview possible witnesses (in shops, etc around the

area) who might have seen the unidentified persons who
were present in the area prior to the commission of the
crime for possible generation of Facial Composite thru the
Crime Laboratory.
 Include the investigation report and other
pertinent documents on the grenade
throwing incident.

 Record the chain of custody of all pieces of

evidence gathered.

 Investigators must undergo training on the

proper handling of digital evidence.