Soviet Emigre Organized Crime Networks in the United States, 1992-1995

The goal of this study was to assess the nature and scope
of Soviet emigre crime in the United States, with a special focus on
the question of whether and how well this crime was organized. The
research project was designed to overcome the lack of reliable and
valid knowledge on Soviet emigre crime networks through the systematic
collection, evaluation, and analysis of information. In Part 1, the
researchers conducted a national survey of 750 law enforcement
specialists and prosecutors to get a general overview of Soviet emigre
crime in the United States. For Parts 2-14, the researchers wanted to
look particularly at the character, operations, and structure, as well
as the criminal ventures and enterprises, of Soviet emigre crime
networks in the New York-New Jersey-Pennsylvania region. They were
also interested in any international criminal connections to these
networks, especially with the former Soviet Union. The investigators
focused particularly on identifying whether these particular networks
met the following criteria commonly used to define organized crime:
(1) some degree of hierarchical structure within the network, (2)
continuity of that structure over time, (3) use of corruption and
violence to facilitate and protect criminal activities, (4) internal
discipline within the network structure, (5) involvement in multiple
criminal enterprises that are carried out with a degree of criminal
sophistication, (6) involvement in legitimate businesses, and (7)
bonding among participants based upon shared ethnicity. Data for Parts
2-14 were collected from a collaborative effort with the Tri-State
Joint Project on Soviet Emigre Organized Crime. From 1992 through 1995
every investigative report or other document produced by the project
was entered into a computer file that became the database for the
network analysis. Documents included undercover observation and
surveillance reports, informant interviews, newspaper articles,
telephone records, intelligence files from other law enforcement
agencies, indictments, and various materials from the former Soviet
Union. Every individual, organization, and other entity mentioned in a
document was considered an actor, given a code number, and entered
into the database. The investigators then used network analysis to
measure ties among individuals and organizations and to examine the
structure of the relationships among the entries in the database. In
Part 1, National Survey of Law Enforcement and Prosecutors Data, law
enforcement officials and prosecutors were asked if their agency had
any contact with criminals from the former Soviet Union, the types of
criminal activity these people were involved in, whether they thought
these suspects were part of a criminal organization, whether this type
of crime was a problem for the agency, whether the agency had any
contact with governmental agencies in the former Soviet Union, and
whether anyone on the staff spoke Russian. Part 2, Actor
Identification Data, contains the network identification of each actor
coded from the documents in Part 3 and identified in the network data
in Parts 4-14. An actor could be an individual, organization, concept,
or location. Information in Part 2 includes the unique actor
identification number, the type of actor, and whether the actor was a
"big player." Part 3, Sources of Data, contains data on the documents
that were the sources of the network data in Parts 4-14. Variables
include the title and date of document, the type of document, and
whether the following dimensions of organized crime were mentioned:
sources of capital, locational decisions, advertising, price setting,
financial arrangements, recruitment, internal structure, corruption,
or overlapping partnerships. Parts 4-14 contain the coding of the ties
among actors in particular types of documents, and are named for them:
indictments, tips, investigative reports, incident reports, search
reports, interview reports, arrest reports, intelligence reports,
criminal acts reports, confidential informant reports, newspaper
reports, social surveillance reports, other surveillance reports, and
company reports.