Infidelity Investigations Resource Guide

Infidelity Investigations: Finding the Truth – What You Should Know Before Hiring a Private Investigator

Professional insight into surveillance, evidence, legal considerations, and the questions prospective clients should ask before hiring a private investigator.

By Robert Cowan & Elizabeth Cowan

Robert Cowan is the owner of Cowan Investigations, a licensed New Jersey private investigator, and the former Chief of the Jersey City Police Department, with decades of investigative experience in both law enforcement and the private sector.

Elizabeth Cowan is a licensed private investigator and co-owner of Cowan Investigations. She serves as the firm’s initial point of contact for many prospective clients, helping individuals navigate some of the most difficult and emotional decisions they will ever face while coordinating investigative strategies with the firm’s investigative team.

Combined, Robert and Elizabeth Cowan have guided over a thousand clients through infidelity, family law, and relationship investigations, providing objective evidence with professionalism, discretion, and compassion.

About This Guide

If you suspect your spouse or partner is cheating, understanding how a professional infidelity investigation works can help you make informed decisions about your next steps. Drawing on decades of investigative experience in New Jersey, Robert and Elizabeth Cowan explain how private investigators approach suspected infidelity, what surveillance can reveal, what evidence can legally be obtained, how investigations are conducted, and what to consider before hiring a private investigator. This guide offers practical insight into the investigative process, its limitations, and what clients can realistically expect.

What Can Decades of Investigative Experience Teach You About Infidelity Investigations?

One of the most important lessons that decades of investigative experience have reinforced is that successful infidelity investigations begin with facts – not assumptions. Throughout my 35-year law enforcement career and the past eleven years as the owner of Cowan Investigations, I have learned that a professional private investigator’s responsibility is not to confirm a client’s suspicions, but to objectively determine the truth, regardless of where the evidence leads.

Clients often come to us believing they already know the answer. Sometimes they are correct; sometimes they are not. Our responsibility is never to validate an opinion or produce a predetermined outcome. Our core mission is to conduct a lawful, professional, and objective investigation that provides our clients with reliable facts upon which they can make informed personal, legal, and financial decisions. Whether an investigation confirms or does not support their suspicions, our objective is to provide the evidence they need to determine the course they will take after receiving the results of the investigation.

Every suspected infidelity investigation is unique because every relationship is distinctive. Some clients are married, while others are engaged, dating, or in long-term committed relationships. Although the situations differ from case to case, the questions are extraordinarily similar. Is my intuition correct? Am I overlooking something? Should I confront my partner? Should I hire a private investigator? Most importantly, how do I obtain reliable answers so I can make informed decisions about my future?

Why People Contact a Private Investigator When They Suspect Their Partner Is Cheating

People contact a private investigator when they suspect their spouse or partner is cheating because they want reliable answers rather than continued uncertainty. Changes in behavior, unexplained absences, unusual schedules, or concerns about another relationship may prompt someone to seek professional assistance. An infidelity investigator can help evaluate those concerns, determine whether an investigation is appropriate, and develop a plan to gather objective evidence.

In this article, I discuss investigations from the perspective of the investigator responsible for planning surveillance, gathering evidence, and determining what the facts ultimately establish. But an infidelity investigation doesn’t begin when investigators arrive at a surveillance location.

It begins with a telephone call.

And in our office, that first call is most often handled by Elizabeth (Liz) Cowan.

For more than 11 years, Liz has been the person prospective clients speak with when they are frightened, uncertain, angry, or simply overwhelmed by what they believe may be happening in their relationship.

Before an infidelity investigation is ever planned, she may spend an hour or more listening to someone’s concerns, answering questions, identifying patterns, discussing investigative options, and helping that someone decide whether moving forward with an investigation even makes sense.

The perspective you’re about to read is hers.

It’s the perspective of the person who answers the telephone, listens to the story, and often remains a client’s primary point of contact throughout the investigation.

Cheating Spouse Investigation Company in Lodi, NJ

The First Phone Call During an Infidelity Investigation (Liz’s Perspective)

When people call our office for the first time, they are often very upset or unsure about what to do. One of the first things I frequently hear is, “I’ve never had to do this before. I’ve never had to call a private investigator.”

I try to make them comfortable from the beginning. I introduce myself and usually say something very simple:

“That’s okay. Tell me what’s going on.”

Then I listen.

One of the most important things you can do during that first conversation is listen before you start talking. In many cases, whatever is happening in their relationship has been consuming their thoughts. They may be thinking about it 24 hours a day, but they don’t necessarily want to discuss something this personal with family members or friends. Sometimes it is easier to open up to someone they don’t know who understands why they’re making that call.

I let them tell me what has been happening. If they say something that raises an important question, I may stop them and say, “I don’t want to interrupt you, but when I hear something and a question comes to mind, I need to ask you about it while we’re there.” I usually explain that at the beginning of the conversation so they understand that I am listening to their story, but I am also trying to gather the information we would need if an investigation becomes necessary.

As the conversation develops, I begin gathering basic information about the person who would be the subject of the investigation: where they live, where they work, their normal schedule, and whether the caller has any idea who the other person might be. Sometimes they do. They may suspect someone from work, for example, or someone the person knew before their current relationship. Every call is different. We hear from husbands and wives, boyfriends and girlfriends, and people in same-sex relationships. I never know what kind of situation I am going to hear when I answer the phone, so I try not to approach a caller with preconceived ideas. I listen to the individual circumstances and let the conversation develop from there.

As people talk, they usually begin explaining the changes that caused them to become suspicious. It might be a change in schedule, a change in how their partner treats them, increased attention to appearance, or a sudden change in how they use their phone. A person who never previously worried about where their phone was may suddenly take it everywhere. Someone may be texting and immediately close the screen when their partner enters the room. Individually, those things don’t prove that someone is cheating, but they help me understand why the caller has become concerned.

One of the questions I often ask is whether they have noticed a pattern. Some callers have already been keeping notes or a journal and can identify particular days or times when something seems different. From an investigative standpoint, that can be extremely helpful.

Other callers haven’t identified any pattern at all. Everything seems random because they are upset and trying to make sense of many things at once. In those situations, I will start asking questions: When did this happen? What day was that? What time did they leave? When did they come home? As we talk, sometimes something clicks and the caller realizes that certain behavior has been occurring on particular days or at particular times.

If we still cannot identify a pattern, I may suggest that they begin paying closer attention and keeping a simple journal to document the dates and times when something seems unusual. The purpose isn’t to assume that their partner is cheating. It is to see whether a pattern actually develops that could help determine when an investigation would have the greatest chance of answering their questions.

Sometimes I also use examples from previous investigations to help explain what I mean. I never identify the client, disclose whether the client was a man or a woman, or provide details that could compromise someone’s confidentiality. I may simply explain, for example, that a previous client initially believed certain behavior was random, but eventually recognized that it tended to occur on particular days of the week.

That first telephone call is really about two things: giving someone an opportunity to explain what is happening and beginning to separate the facts they know from the things they suspect. From there, we can start determining whether there is enough information to consider an investigation and, if there is, how that investigation might be approached.

cheatin

Identifying Patterns and Determining When an Infidelity Investigation Should Begin

As I listen, I want to understand the person’s routine. I want to know their work schedule, whether they regularly go to a gym and when they go, what their routine is during the week and on weekends, and when the client believes something may be happening.

If the client suspects something is happening during the workday, we may approach the situation differently than if the concern involves what happens after work. Weekends can present a completely different set of circumstances. The goal is to take all of the information the client has and narrow it down to particular days and times when surveillance is most likely to provide useful results.

Some clients already have very specific days in mind. Others don’t. They know something doesn’t seem right, but everything appears random.

When a client has no particular day in mind and asks me where I would start, I often discuss Mondays, Thursdays, and Fridays. Over the years, I have found that those can sometimes be productive days in relationship investigations. If another person is also married or in a relationship, seeing each other during the weekend may be more difficult. Monday may provide an opportunity after the weekend, while Thursday or Friday may provide an opportunity before another weekend begins.

That certainly doesn’t mean something happens on those days in every case. Every relationship and every investigation is different. It is simply one of the things I consider when a client has very little information and we are trying to decide where it makes sense to begin.

I also try to pinpoint the time. What time does the person normally leave for work? What time do they finish? When do they go to the gym? Are there particular periods of time the client cannot account for?

The more we understand about the person’s normal routine, the better we can identify when something appears to deviate from it.

Gathering Information Before an Infidelity Investigation Begins

Once we begin discussing a possible investigation, there are many practical questions I need to ask the client.

If our investigators may have to begin surveillance at someone’s residence, for example, I need to understand what that location is like. Is it a single-family house? Is it on a busy street or in a quiet neighborhood? Is it located on a cul-de-sac, in a gated townhouse development, or in an apartment building? Are there exterior cameras around the residence?

Those details may sound insignificant to someone who has never been involved in an investigation, but they can be very important when our investigators begin planning the surveillance.

I gather this information so that our investigators understand the environment before they arrive. We don’t want to wait until the morning of the surveillance to discover something about the location that the client could have told us beforehand.

This is also why I ask for as much identifying information as the client can provide. We need to make sure our investigators can identify the correct person and understand that person’s routine before the investigation begins.

Why Do We Use Two Investigators During Mobile Surveillance?

We generally recommend two investigators for mobile surveillance because following someone from one location to another can be unpredictable. Traffic conditions, unexpected turns, and changes in a subject’s movements can make it difficult for one investigator to maintain surveillance without attracting attention. Working as a team gives our investigators greater flexibility and improves our ability to document activity discreetly.

Sometimes a prospective client initially questions why two investigators are necessary. I understand the question because they are paying for the investigation, and they want to understand what they are paying for.

There are situations where two investigators may not be necessary. For example, if the client knows that the subject is going to be at a particular location for a particular period and there will be no mobile surveillance involved, that may be a different situation.

I explain that surveillance is unpredictable. The environment where surveillance begins may make it difficult for an investigator to remain close to the subject without attracting attention. Traffic conditions, traffic lights, congestion, and many other circumstances can interfere once a vehicle begins moving.

Using two investigators gives us considerably more flexibility. It allows investigators to work together rather than requiring a single investigator in one vehicle to maintain the best position throughout the surveillance. I would rather explain the cost and the reason for it before an investigation begins than have a client misunderstand how we work or why we recommended a particular approach.

I also think it is important to be honest with clients about what can happen during surveillance.

People are understandably concerned about whether the person being investigated could discover that they are being followed. In more than eleven years in business, there have been rare occasions when an investigator has been detected. If a client asks whether our firm has ever been detected during surveillance, I tell them the truth: it has happened, but it is rare. Be wary of a private investigator who tells you they have conducted surveillance for years and have never been detected or have never lost a subject.

Investigators can take precautions to substantially reduce the chances of detection. The way an investigation is staffed, the location where surveillance begins, and the way investigators position themselves can all make a difference. That is another reason we generally prefer two investigators when mobile surveillance is involved.

However, there are things an investigator cannot control. Traffic can suddenly change. A traffic light can separate an investigator from a subject. A subject can drive aggressively or unexpectedly change direction. Something completely unforeseen can happen.

I think clients deserve to understand that before they spend their money. By understanding those limitations, clients can develop realistic expectations about what an investigation can and cannot accomplish.

Our job is to develop the best plan we can from the information available, use experienced investigators, reduce unnecessary risks, and give the investigation the best reasonable opportunity to succeed. It is not to promise a client something that no private investigator can honestly guarantee.

Understanding What the Caller Really Wants to Know

Most of the time, when someone calls me, what they really want to know is what is going on. They may strongly suspect that their partner is cheating, but they don’t know for certain, and that uncertainty can become extremely difficult to live with.

Sometimes they tell me that when they have questioned their partner about changes they have noticed, their concerns are dismissed. They may be told that they are imagining things, overreacting, or even that they are being “crazy.” After hearing that repeatedly, some people begin questioning their own instincts and wondering whether they are seeing something that isn’t really there.

When they call me, I don’t assume that their suspicions are correct. My job isn’t to tell someone that their partner is cheating simply because they believe that to be the case. I listen to what has been happening, what changes they have noticed, and why those changes are concerning to them.

Ultimately, most people are looking for an answer. They want to know whether there is actually something going on or whether there isn’t. Sometimes knowing the truth—even when it isn’t the answer they were hoping for—is better than continuing to live with uncertainty.

When the Caller Is Overwhelmed

Sometimes the person who calls me is extremely emotional. They may be crying, angry, confused, or simply overwhelmed by everything that has been happening. You have to understand that most people who contact us have never called a private investigator before. They don’t know what to expect, and making that first call can be a very big step for them.

There are times when a conversation can become very emotional, and the person has difficulty even explaining what has happened. When that occurs, I try to reassure them and give them a chance to gather their thoughts. I don’t want them to feel that they have to tell me everything perfectly or have all of the answers before they call.

I try to be empathetic because I understand that this is not simply an investigation to the person on the other end of the telephone. This is their relationship and their life, and they may be facing something they never expected to have to deal with. Part of my role is helping them get through that initial conversation so we can begin looking at the situation more clearly.

When Children Are Involved in a Suspected Infidelity Investigation

It can become even more difficult when children are involved. A caller may not only be thinking about what infidelity could mean for their relationship. They may also be worried about what could happen to their family and how any decisions they make could affect their children, particularly when the children are young.

Those concerns are often part of the conversation as well. I keep that in mind when I speak with someone because the decision about whether to investigate a partner does not always affect just the two people in the relationship. There may be an entire family behind that telephone call.

Managing Expectations About Investigative Results

One of the most common questions I hear is, “How long does an infidelity investigation take?” The answer depends on the circumstances. Sometimes investigators obtain important information quickly, while other investigations require multiple surveillance periods. We cannot promise someone that we are going to begin surveillance on Monday and have the answer for them by Monday afternoon. I have to explain that real investigations don’t always work that way. We cannot promise someone that we are going to begin surveillance on Monday and have the answer for them by Monday afternoon.

In some investigations, nothing significant happens during the first surveillance period. We have had investigations where very little happened during the first day or two, and then, on another day, the investigators obtained a tremendous amount of useful information.

That is one of the things I try to explain before the investigation begins. Surveillance can document what actually happens while investigators are present, but we cannot control when or whether the activity the client suspects will occur.

Budget is also part of that conversation. Most people do not have an unlimited amount of money to spend on an investigation. We have to consider what the client can reasonably afford and then try to use the information they have given us to determine when surveillance may have the best chance of being productive.

I think it is important for clients to understand that there are no guarantees. Sometimes an investigation produces answers very quickly, and sometimes it takes more than one attempt. I would rather explain that honestly at the beginning than give someone an unrealistic expectation simply because they are anxious to know the answer.

Another common question is, “Will I receive live updates during surveillance?”

We do not provide live surveillance updates, and that policy is specifically addressed in our retainer agreement. Communicating back and forth during active surveillance can create unnecessary distractions, compromise the investigation, or create safety concerns for our investigators and others.

If our investigators need information from the client while an investigation is taking place, we will contact the client and ask the necessary question. But we do not provide a running account of where the subject is, what the subject is doing, or where our investigators are located while surveillance is active.

What Can a Private Investigator Legally Photograph and Record in New Jersey?

Private investigators in New Jersey can generally photograph and document activities they can lawfully observe from locations where they are permitted to be. However, investigators must respect an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy and comply with applicable laws governing surveillance and recording.

Clients sometimes ask whether an investigator can use a powerful camera lens to look through the window of someone’s home. I explain that we do not use our equipment to intrude into private spaces where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

We use different types of photographic and video equipment depending on the circumstances. Our investigators have high-quality 4K camera equipment, but there are situations where taking out a larger camera would be inappropriate or would draw unnecessary attention. If an investigator is inside a restaurant or another public venue, for example, a cell phone may be a much more natural way to document what is occurring.

The equipment is simply a tool. The important thing is obtaining useful evidence while conducting the investigation lawfully and without unnecessarily drawing attention to the investigator. The photographs and video we obtain are maintained with the corresponding date and time information so that the evidence can be properly documented as part of the investigation.

How Cowan Investigations Protects Client Confidentiality and Privacy

Confidentiality is another concern that comes up frequently, particularly during an initial telephone call. I explain to clients that the information they provide to us is confidential. We do not disclose information about our clients or the particulars of an investigation to other people.

Some callers are concerned that their partner may look through their phone and discover that they have been communicating with a private investigator. If someone has that concern, I may suggest that they save my telephone number in their contacts under a different name so that it is not immediately identifiable as a private investigator’s number.

There are also people who are understandably reluctant during the first call to provide their name, the subject’s name, an address, or other identifying information. I understand that. They are speaking with someone they have never met about an extremely personal situation, and sometimes they need time before they are comfortable providing those details.

At the same time, there comes a point where I need certain information if I am going to discuss a potential investigation intelligently. There are simply too many variables involved. Where would the surveillance begin? What type of location is it? What does the subject’s schedule look like? What exactly is the client concerned about? Those details can substantially affect how an investigation would be approached.

If someone isn’t comfortable providing the information we need, I don’t pressure them. Sometimes I will suggest that they take some time, think about it, and call me back when they are ready.

I think a client has to be comfortable with the person they are speaking with before they move forward. But once we begin discussing an actual investigative plan or preparing a proposal, there is certain information we need in order to properly evaluate the circumstances and explain how we would approach the investigation.

How Much Does an Infidelity Investigation Cost in New Jersey?

The cost of an infidelity investigation in New Jersey depends on the circumstances of the case, the amount of surveillance required, and the number of investigators needed. At Cowan Investigations, we require a retainer to begin an investigation, and investigative time is billed against that retainer at our established hourly rates. I explain our fee structure and the factors that may affect the total cost before a client decides whether to move forward.

The cost also depends on how the investigation needs to be staffed. If the circumstances call for two investigators, I explain why we believe two investigators are important. Sometimes a prospective client will tell me, “I can’t afford two investigators. Can you just use one?”

There are cases where my answer has to be no.

If we believe a particular mobile surveillance requires two investigators to be conducted properly, we are not going to accept the assignment using only one investigator simply to make the investigation less expensive. The client is already committing significant money to obtain answers, and we want to give the investigation a reasonable opportunity to be successful.

That doesn’t mean every investigation automatically requires two investigators. There are many circumstances where one investigator may be entirely appropriate. If the surveillance is going to be stationary, for example, or if the circumstances do not involve following a subject from one location to another, we may determine that one investigator is sufficient.

Infidelity investigations, however, frequently involve mobile surveillance. A subject may leave one location, travel somewhere else, and continue moving throughout the surveillance period. In those circumstances, we generally believe that using two investigators gives us the best opportunity to conduct the surveillance effectively.

I would rather explain that honestly to someone before they retain our firm—even if it means they ultimately decide not to hire us—than accept an investigation under conditions that we do not believe provide a reasonable opportunity to accomplish what the client is paying us to do.

When Is It Too Early to Hire a Private Investigator for Infidelity?

Sometimes, after speaking with a prospective client, I feel that they simply aren’t ready to move forward with an investigation. They may be very upset and genuinely believe that something is happening, but they don’t yet have enough information for us to determine when or how an investigation should begin.

In those situations, I may recommend that they wait before starting an investigation.

Instead, I suggest that they begin paying closer attention to their partner’s normal routine. Are there particular periods when their significant other suddenly becomes unavailable or cannot be reached? What time do they normally leave for work and return home? Have there been changes in their gym schedule, work schedule, or other regular activities? Are there specific days or times when something consistently seems different?

The more information a client can provide about a person’s routine, the better we can determine whether an investigation is appropriate and, if so, how it should be structured.

I often suggest keeping a simple journal. Write down dates, times, changes in routine, periods when the person is unexpectedly unavailable, and anything else that seems unusual.

Sometimes callers don’t think that a small piece of information could possibly matter, but what seems insignificant to them may be very relevant to us. When several small pieces of information are put together, a pattern may begin to emerge.

Once they have gathered more information, I tell them to call me back so we can discuss the situation again. At that point, we may have a much better idea of whether an investigation makes sense and, if it does, when surveillance would have the best opportunity to provide useful information.

I don’t want someone spending money on an investigation when I don’t believe we have enough information to approach it intelligently. Sometimes, the best advice I can give during that first conversation is simply this: pay attention, document what you’re seeing, and call me back when you know a little more.

People generally appreciate that approach. They understand that I’m not trying to convince them to begin an investigation simply because they contacted our office.

Remaining the Client’s Primary Point of Contact

Once an investigation begins, clients are understandably anxious to know what is happening. Although I explain before the investigation begins—and our retainer agreement also states—that we do not provide live updates during surveillance, clients will sometimes call me while the investigation is underway.

I understand why. They have been waiting for this day. They know our investigators are out there, and naturally, they want to know what is happening.

If a client calls me, I answer the telephone and speak with them. I may have to remind them that I cannot provide live information about what our investigators are seeing or where the subject or investigators are located. However, I never want a client to feel that they cannot contact me.

There is another reason communication can be important. Sometimes, a client is calling because they have just learned something that could be significant to the investigation. If that happens, I can obtain the information and make sure it gets to our investigators without unnecessarily interrupting or distracting them from the surveillance.

Communication can also work in the opposite direction. If our investigators need information from the client while surveillance is underway, I am generally the point of contact. I can contact the client, obtain the information the investigators need, and relay it back to them.

That allows our investigators to concentrate on the surveillance while I maintain communication with the client. It also provides the client with one consistent point of contact throughout the investigation—the same person they have been speaking with from the beginning and someone who already understands the circumstances that brought them to us.

I believe that continuity is important. The investigators in the field need to remain focused on conducting the investigation, while the client needs to know that there is still someone available who understands their concerns and can communicate with the investigators when necessary.

What Happens When an Infidelity Investigation Is Completed?

At the conclusion of an investigation, I am usually the person who speaks with the client about what our investigators found.

That conversation can be emotional, particularly when the investigation confirms something the client was hoping was not true. By that point, however, I have usually spoken with the client numerous times. I know something about what they have been going through, they have become comfortable speaking with me, and I have become familiar with their situation.

I try to tread lightly when I have information that I know will be difficult for someone to hear. At the same time, I have to tell them what we found. That is ultimately why they hired us. They came to us because they wanted an answer, and sometimes that answer is painful.

There are also investigations that lead in a different direction. The surveillance may not confirm what the client suspected, or it may develop information that provides a different explanation for the behavior that originally caused concern. Whatever the result may be, our responsibility is the same: tell the client what the investigation actually established, not what they—or we—expected to find.

After discussing the results, clients often want to know how they can receive the evidence that was obtained. That depends upon what they need.

We can prepare a comprehensive investigative report documenting the surveillance and incorporating relevant photographs obtained during the investigation. Depending upon the circumstances, those images may have been captured using our 4K camera equipment, cell phones, or other appropriate equipment used during the surveillance. Video obtained during the investigation can also be provided when appropriate.

Not every client necessarily wants or needs a full written report. In some situations, a client may simply want copies of particular photographs, video, or other documentation. We discuss what the client is seeking and provide the appropriate investigative materials based upon their needs.

The important thing is that the client receives the information we were able to establish during the investigation. Whether the investigation confirms their suspicions or leads to a different conclusion, our responsibility is to report what we actually observed and documented. An infidelity investigation is not conducted to prove that a client was right. It is conducted to obtain reliable information so that the client can make informed decisions about what they want to do next.

What Eleven Years of Conversations With Clients Have Taught Me

After more than 11 years of speaking with clients, I have learned how important it can be for one person to remain involved from the beginning of an investigation through its conclusion.

Our investigators are in the field doing their jobs, concentrating on surveillance and gathering evidence. My role is different. Because I may have spent considerable time speaking with the client and learning about the relationship, the subject’s routines, the client’s concerns, and all of the small details surrounding the situation, the information I have gathered can sometimes become invaluable to our investigators in the field. Something a client mentioned during an earlier conversation may suddenly become important when an investigator encounters an unexpected situation during surveillance. Because I know the history behind the investigation, I can often provide context that might otherwise be missed.

I also think that the continuity and rapport we have built are important to the client. The person they spoke with during that first difficult telephone call is still there as the investigation moves forward and when the results eventually come in. They do not have to start over with someone new each time they have a question or something changes.

Many clients have continued to contact me after their investigations are over. Sometimes they simply call to tell me how they are doing or to update me about what has happened in their lives. Some may be going through a divorce or other family court proceedings. Others may later need assistance with a child custody matter or another type of investigation. And some just want to check in.

There are people I still hear from years after their original investigation.

I appreciate those calls because I like knowing what happened to the people I spent so much time speaking with. I also like knowing that the work we did helped someone obtain the information they needed to make important decisions about their lives.

I remember that many of these people first came to me when they were extremely upset and uncertain about what was happening. Some had even been told by their spouse or significant other that they were imagining things or that they were “crazy” for questioning what they were seeing.

Years later, it is rewarding to hear from someone who has moved forward with their life and is doing well. Whatever the investigation ultimately established, they are no longer the frightened or overwhelmed person who made that first telephone call.

For me, that is an important part of this work. An infidelity investigation may begin with surveillance and the need to establish facts, but there is a real person—and often an entire family—behind every investigation. After more than 11 years of speaking with clients, that is something I have learned never to lose sight of.

A Note About Client Confidentiality

The examples discussed in this article are drawn from our investigative experience. To protect the privacy of our clients and the individuals involved, identifying details have been omitted or changed, including names, locations, timelines, and other circumstances that could reveal a person’s identity. In some instances, examples may combine characteristics of similar cases while preserving the investigative issue being discussed.

What Happens After You Decide to Hire a Private Investigator

Once a client decides to move forward with a New Jersey infidelity investigation, the focus shifts from uncertainty to fact-finding. While every investigation is unique, the objective remains the same: to lawfully obtain reliable, objective evidence that allows the client to make informed decisions based on facts rather than suspicion.

Contrary to what many people believe from television and the movies, successful infidelity investigations are rarely the result of luck or dramatic confrontations. They are the product of careful planning, attention to detail, patience, experience, and the ability to recognize and respond to patterns of behavior as they develop.

Every investigation begins with developing a strategy tailored to the client’s specific circumstances, objectives, and the information available at the outset of the case. There is no single investigative plan that works for every situation. The strategy that makes sense for one client may make little sense for another.

Careful preparation is one of the most important factors in obtaining reliable results. Before surveillance begins, investigators analyze the information provided by the client, identify investigative objectives, evaluate potential locations and timelines, and develop a strategy designed to maximize the opportunity to obtain objective evidence while using the client’s resources efficiently.

That preparation also allows investigators to anticipate likely movements and potential problems before surveillance begins. At the same time, no amount of planning can predict everything a subject may do. A good investigative strategy therefore has to provide direction while remaining flexible enough to change when the circumstances change.

Planning the Investigation Before Surveillance Begins

After Liz has completed the initial client intake, I review the case again from an investigator’s perspective. The information she has gathered and vetted is extremely important because it provides the foundation upon which we begin developing an investigative plan.

I start by reviewing the people who may be involved, available photographs, vehicles, addresses, workplaces, social media information, schedules, and any locations the client has identified as potentially significant. I am also looking for gaps in the information we have and determining whether anything should be clarified or developed before surveillance begins.

Sometimes, the only person we know at the beginning is the subject of the investigation—the client’s husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, or other partner. The client may have no idea whether another person is involved or, if there is, who that person might be.

In other cases, the client already suspects a particular individual. When that occurs, we also examine the available information concerning that person and evaluate any photographs, vehicles, addresses, workplaces, or locations that may become relevant during the investigation.

I also want to know something about the subject’s normal driving habits. Does the person generally drive fast? Are they an aggressive driver? Do they frequently change lanes or drive in a manner that may make mobile surveillance more difficult? That information can be extremely useful before investigators enter the field because it gives us some idea of what we may encounter once the subject begins moving.

We also want to know whether there is anything about the subject’s behavior or circumstances that could affect how the surveillance should be conducted safely and discreetly. For example, has the subject previously expressed concern about being followed, confronted the client about surveillance, or demonstrated an unusual awareness of vehicles or people around them? Information like that can affect the investigative approach from the outset.

One of the most important decisions we make during the planning stage is determining where surveillance should begin. Do we begin at the subject’s residence, at the workplace, or at another location connected to the subject’s normal routine?

That decision can have a significant effect on the investigation. Starting at the wrong location can mean spending hours waiting for someone who is not there. More importantly, beginning at the right location can sometimes determine whether investigators are in position when the activity we are trying to document actually begins.

Before investigators enter the field, I review the geography and mapping surrounding the anticipated starting point. I want to understand the type of neighborhood or environment we are entering, the road network, possible travel routes, and locations from which surveillance may reasonably be established.

I also identify other locations associated with the subject and, when applicable, the person the client suspects may be involved. Those locations can become extremely important once surveillance begins. If investigators become separated from a subject during mobile surveillance, knowing other places the subject may reasonably travel provides us with potential locations where surveillance may be reestablished.

Any investigation that we reasonably anticipate will involve mobile surveillance—whether by vehicle or on foot—will normally be staffed with two investigators. I frequently work in the field alongside our investigators as well, particularly when we have one or two active assignments underway. The use of two investigators is not simply about having another person available. Mobile surveillance can change quickly, and having a second investigator provides additional options when traffic, road conditions, unexpected movements, or the surrounding environment make it difficult for one investigator to maintain surveillance without becoming conspicuous.

The location where surveillance begins is particularly important because investigators cannot simply assume that they can park directly outside someone’s residence for hours without attracting attention. Although an investigator may lawfully be present in a public location, an unfamiliar occupied vehicle parked for an extended period in a quiet residential neighborhood can attract attention from residents.

Someone may contact the police, communicate with neighbors, post about the vehicle in a neighborhood social media group, or otherwise draw attention to the surveillance. Once attention is drawn to a surveillance vehicle, the investigation can become substantially more difficult.

Part of our planning, therefore, involves determining how investigators can operate in that particular environment without unnecessarily attracting attention. A surveillance approach that may work well on a busy city street may be completely inappropriate on a quiet suburban cul-de-sac.

Depending upon the circumstances, there are different ways to approach a difficult surveillance location. Investigators may use different vehicles or techniques designed to make a surveillance vehicle less conspicuous. In particularly challenging environments, technology may also provide alternatives to requiring an investigator to remain immediately adjacent to the location for an extended period.

For example, when lawful and appropriate under the circumstances, we have used remotely monitored camera systems to observe activity at a location while investigators remain farther away. We have used this type of approach in cohabitation investigations when maintaining a traditional surveillance position near a residence would have unnecessarily increased the likelihood of detection.

Technology, however, does not replace an investigator. It is simply another investigative tool, and whether it is useful depends upon the circumstances of the particular assignment.

The particular technique is less important than the planning behind it. Before an investigator ever enters the field, I want to understand the people involved, the relevant locations, the environment surrounding those locations, the likely movements of the subject, and the potential problems our investigators may encounter.

There is no single surveillance plan that works for every investigation. The objective is to develop an investigative approach around the specific circumstances of the case rather than trying to force every case into the same investigative model. And even the best investigative plan has to remain flexible, because once surveillance begins, the subject—not the investigator—often determines what happens next.

What Actually Happens When Surveillance Begins

Once the planning stage is complete, the investigation moves into the field. This is where the investigative plan meets the reality of what is actually happening that day. During an infidelity investigation, surveillance typically involves investigators establishing discreet positions near a subject’s anticipated location, observing their movements, and documenting relevant activity through photographs, video, and investigative notes when lawful and appropriate.

Consider a typical situation. A client tells us that their partner normally leaves home at approximately 7:00 a.m. The subject has a job that provides considerable flexibility during the day, and the client believes the subject may travel from a suburban area into a more urban environment. The client wants surveillance conducted throughout the day to determine where the subject goes and what actually occurs.

If the anticipated departure time is 7:00 a.m., my partner and I are not arriving at 7:00. We generally want to be in the area at least 30 minutes beforehand.

We will already have examined the location using available mapping and imagery during the planning stage, but remote mapping is not the same as being there. Images can be outdated, traffic patterns can change, construction may be underway, and a surveillance position that appeared suitable on a map can look completely different when you actually arrive.

Arriving early also protects against the possibility that the subject may leave earlier than expected. More importantly, it gives us time to evaluate the location under the actual conditions we will be working in and establish our positions before the subject begins moving.

Normally, we are not going to position an occupied surveillance vehicle immediately outside the subject’s residence. Depending upon the neighborhood, one investigator may establish a position several houses away where the residence or the subject’s vehicle can still be observed without unnecessarily exposing the investigator to the subject.

The second investigator may remain nearby but off the immediate street. That gives us options regardless of which direction the subject travels when leaving the neighborhood. Once the subject begins moving, the second investigator can enter the surveillance from a different position rather than requiring one vehicle to make every turn directly behind the subject.

During our preparation, Liz will have asked the client whether they know the subject’s normal route. Which direction do they usually turn when leaving home? How do they access the major highways? Is there a route they normally take to work?

That information is helpful, but we never assume the subject will do exactly what the client expects. Investigators must always be prepared for the subject to do something completely different that morning. A normal routine tells us what may happen. Surveillance establishes what actually happens.

The physical layout of a neighborhood can also influence the approach. A cul-de-sac, for example, can sometimes simplify the initial setup because investigators may be able to establish surveillance outside the immediate street and wait for the subject’s vehicle to emerge. In other circumstances, the layout may make surveillance considerably more difficult because there may be very few places from which an investigator can observe activity without being noticed.

Whenever possible, we want to document the subject and the vehicle at the beginning of the surveillance. However, obtaining a photograph or video of someone simply walking from their house to their car is not worth compromising the investigation.

The primary objective is maintaining the surveillance.

If we can obtain that initial video discreetly, we will. If obtaining it would unnecessarily expose an investigator’s position, we do not risk the entire investigation merely to produce an image demonstrating that we were present. There will usually be better opportunities to obtain meaningful video once the subject begins moving and engaging in activity.

That judgment—knowing when to obtain video and when not to risk exposing the surveillance—is something investigators make repeatedly throughout the day. The objective is not to record every second of a person’s movements. It is to maintain surveillance and document activity that may be relevant to the purpose of the investigation.

How Investigators Communicate During Mobile Surveillance

Once the subject begins moving, communication between investigators becomes critical.

My partner and I generally remain in continuous telephone communication during mobile surveillance, with only brief interruptions when circumstances require it. We are constantly exchanging information about the subject’s location, traffic conditions, positioning, and what each investigator should do next. That communication allows the investigators to function as a team even though they may be separated by several vehicles or, at times, may not both have visual contact with the subject.

Two-investigator surveillance does not mean placing two vehicles directly behind the subject and following that way throughout the day. Quite the opposite.

Whenever circumstances permit, we prefer to have an unrelated vehicle positioned between the subject and the investigator maintaining the primary visual position. We sometimes refer to that unrelated vehicle as a cover vehicle. It provides a natural separation between the subject and the surveillance vehicle rather than having the same investigator continuously visible immediately behind the subject. The second investigator remains farther back and is prepared to assume the primary position when circumstances change.

The investigators continually rotate their positions when appropriate. If I have been behind a subject for an extended period, there may come a point when my partner assumes the closer position while I fall back. Later, we may reverse those roles. Ideally, those transitions occur naturally within the existing traffic so that nothing about the movement of the surveillance vehicles appears unusual.

Traffic lights require another adjustment. If the subject is approaching an intersection and there is a significant possibility that the investigators could become separated by a traffic signal, one investigator may temporarily close the distance while the other maintains a different position. Those decisions sometimes have to be made within seconds, which is another reason continuous communication between investigators is so important.

The objective is not to remain attached to the subject’s rear bumper. It is to maintain visual contact while reducing the likelihood that the subject repeatedly sees the same vehicle.

Interestingly, heavy traffic can sometimes make mobile surveillance easier rather than harder. When everyone is moving slowly and vehicles are naturally close together, an investigator can maintain a relatively close position without appearing unusual. The surrounding traffic can actually provide natural cover for the surveillance vehicle.

Highway surveillance can also be more manageable than people might expect. When traffic is moving steadily, investigators can use surrounding vehicles and the natural flow of traffic to maintain surveillance without remaining conspicuously close to the subject. It also provides opportunities for investigators to change positions naturally without drawing attention to either surveillance vehicle.

An unusually fast or aggressive driver can obviously make surveillance more difficult, and we are never going to jeopardize anyone’s safety simply to maintain contact with a subject. There are times when an investigator has to make the decision to let a subject go rather than drive recklessly in an attempt to maintain surveillance. Losing a subject is frustrating, but no investigation is worth causing an accident or putting someone in danger.

When the Subject Makes an Unexpected Turn

Surveillance can change in seconds.

Suppose the subject unexpectedly signals and turns into a large shopping center. The investigator immediately behind the subject may deliberately continue past the entrance rather than make the same sudden turn directly behind the subject’s vehicle. Following the subject through an abrupt turn simply because the subject turned can unnecessarily draw attention to the surveillance vehicle.

The second investigator, who may be several vehicles farther back, can enter the shopping center naturally and maintain surveillance. The first investigator can then circle back and reposition.

That is one of the major advantages of having two investigators. It gives us options. One investigator does not have to make every movement the subject makes simply to maintain the surveillance.

If the subject parks and enters a business, the circumstances determine what happens next. One investigator may remain with the subject’s vehicle while the other continues the surveillance on foot.

If the subject enters a location where pedestrian surveillance would be inappropriate or impossible, investigators may instead establish positions that allow them to detect the subject when they leave. The decision depends upon the location, the circumstances, and whether attempting to continue inside would create an unnecessary risk of exposing the investigation.

We also look at how the parking area is configured. If there is only one practical direction in which the subject can depart, one investigator may reposition to an adjacent location along that route while the other remains closer to the subject’s vehicle. When the subject leaves, the investigator positioned farther away can assume the mobile surveillance without requiring the investigator who has been sitting near the subject to immediately follow behind.

Throughout all of this, we are continually evaluating whether the subject may be becoming suspicious.

We try to determine beforehand whether the client has confronted their partner about possible infidelity or otherwise said something that might cause the subject to believe they could be under surveillance. Sometimes, clients minimize how extensively they have questioned their partner. That matters because a subject who already believes their activities are being questioned may be more alert to vehicles or people around them. Something that might mean nothing to an unsuspecting subject—the same vehicle appearing more than once, for example—may be noticed by someone who is already looking for signs that they are being followed.

That is another reason experienced investigators resist the temptation to remain too close.

We need to keep the subject in sight, but we don’t need to be attached to the subject. Sometimes maintaining a little more distance is what allows us to continue the surveillance for the rest of the day.

Planning for the Possibility of Losing the Subject

It is always possible to lose someone during mobile surveillance. Anyone who has conducted enough surveillance understands that. Traffic lights change, vehicles unexpectedly enter or leave the roadway, traffic conditions shift, and subjects sometimes make movements that simply cannot be safely followed.

That is why preparation becomes so important.

During the client intake and our subsequent planning, we try to identify as many locations associated with the subject as possible. Where do they work? What gym do they use? What bank? What dry cleaner do they use? What businesses do they regularly visit? Do they have relatives or friends in the area? Are there other locations the client knows they frequent?

If investigators become separated from the subject, those addresses can become extremely valuable. Instead of simply driving around hoping to relocate someone, we have potential destinations that can be checked in an effort to reestablish surveillance. The circumstances at the time we lose the subject may also help determine which locations make the most sense to check first. The direction of travel, time of day, the subject’s known routine, and where the subject had been immediately before visual contact was lost can all become relevant.

That preparation has made a difference in actual investigations. There have been occasions when we lost visual contact with a subject and subsequently relocated the subject at a location we had identified before surveillance ever began. In other cases, checking a known location may allow us to determine that the subject is not there and move on to another possibility.

There is also an important judgment call involved. Investigators cannot allow the frustration of losing a subject to cause them to begin driving recklessly or making increasingly aggressive attempts to regain contact. Sometimes the correct decision is to accept that visual contact has been lost and rely on the investigative information developed beforehand to determine what to do next.

Losing a subject is never what an investigator wants to happen, but it is a reality of surveillance. The difference is whether investigators are prepared for that possibility and have a reasonable plan for attempting to reestablish the investigation.

A Case Study Where the Subject’s Own Routine Revealed the Answer

One investigation illustrates how planning, two-investigator surveillance, and careful observation can come together.

The identifying circumstances of this case have been changed to protect the privacy of everyone involved.

A client who lived outside the immediate area contacted us because she strongly suspected that her husband was involved with someone else. His work provided him with considerable freedom to travel throughout a large metropolitan area, making him a particularly difficult surveillance subject.

The client wanted us to follow him for an extended period. Initially, I was reluctant to accept the assignment.

Based on the amount of territory he covered and the number of locations he could potentially visit, I explained that even with multiple investigators, there was a real possibility that we could lose him. I did not want the client spending a substantial amount of money believing that we could guarantee something I knew we could not guarantee.

She understood the concern but remained adamant that she wanted us to proceed.

One piece of information she provided eventually became very important.

The client had lawful access to records from a shared account that showed certain toll activity associated with her husband’s travels. One particular toll was consistent with a route he might take when visiting a relative. Seeing that transaction ordinarily reassured her because it appeared to confirm where he had gone.

There had also been another toll transaction on a different occasion that she could not explain.

On the morning of the surveillance, my partner and I arrived early and established positions near the residence. The subject departed as expected, and we began mobile surveillance.

His first stop was at a business the client had told us he frequently visited. We handled the stop using our two-investigator approach. One investigator entered the property with the subject while the other repositioned farther along the only practical departure route.

The subject purchased ordinary morning items and continued driving.

Initially, everything appeared routine.

He then crossed a major bridge into another urban area, passing through the toll location that the client associated with his relative.

At first, that appeared to support exactly what the client expected.

But almost immediately after entering the area, the subject began making a series of turns and headed back toward the highway he had just left.

My first thought was that he might have detected the surveillance.

Then something else occurred to me.

He had gone through the toll and almost immediately reversed direction.

I began to consider whether the toll transaction itself might have significance. If someone later reviewed the shared account, the transaction would show that he had traveled through the toll location the client associated with visits to his relative. We could not know why he had taken that route, but his immediate reversal made the movement noteworthy.

We continued the surveillance while maintaining sufficient distance.

Several miles after returning in the opposite direction, the subject entered a small motel.

One investigator followed him onto the property while the second covered another entrance. We documented the subject entering the motel office and subsequently identified where his vehicle was parked.

The subject had arrived carrying two coffees.

A short time later, my partner observed another vehicle enter the property. A woman parked near the room associated with the subject. The subject approached her vehicle, brought her one of the coffees, and the two briefly kissed.

The subject then moved his own vehicle to another area of the property. The woman remained parked near the room, and shortly afterward, both were no longer visible from our exterior surveillance positions in the immediate vicinity of the room.

We maintained surveillance.

Approximately four hours later, the two emerged. They again displayed affection before separating and returning to their respective vehicles.

At that point, we followed the woman from the motel and were able to establish where she lived.

The investigation that I had initially worried might require following a difficult subject throughout a large metropolitan area had produced significant evidence relatively early in the surveillance.

But it wasn’t luck alone.

Information supplied by the client, advance planning, the use of two investigators, an understanding of the subject’s routine, recognizing the significance of an unexpected change in direction, and being positioned to react when the subject entered the motel all contributed to the result.

The toll transaction was particularly instructive. Standing alone, it appeared to support the explanation the client had previously accepted. It was only when we observed what happened immediately after the subject passed through that location that the same piece of information took on a different potential significance.

That is the nature of surveillance. You develop the best plan possible before entering the field, but once the subject begins moving, the investigation becomes fluid. Experienced investigators must continually interpret what they are seeing, communicate with one another, adjust their positions, and recognize when something that initially appears insignificant may actually become the most important development of the day.

What Are Investigators Looking for During an Infidelity Investigation?

During an infidelity investigation, private investigators look for observable behavior that may help establish whether a spouse or partner is involved in another relationship. This can include meetings with another person, displays of physical affection, visits to particular locations, and repeated patterns of activity. However, what constitutes sufficient evidence differs from client to client. Evidence that provides one client with the answer they need may not be sufficient for another.

That is something we have observed repeatedly over the years.

For example, suppose a client’s wife drives to a shopping center, parks her vehicle, and gets into a vehicle occupied by another man. The vehicle has heavily tinted windows, and she remains inside with him for an hour.

For one client, that may be enough. The circumstances alone may answer the question that caused them to hire an investigator.

Another client may look at exactly the same evidence and want something more definitive.

That is one of the realities of infidelity investigations. There is no single photograph, observation, or circumstance that will satisfy every client. What may be significant is often the combination of circumstances: where the subject went, who they met, how long they remained together, whether their behavior was consistent with what the client had been told, and what occurred before and after the meeting.

Our responsibility as investigators is not to decide for the client what those observations mean to their marriage or relationship. Our responsibility is to accurately document what we observe and provide the client with reliable information.

Sometimes the evidence is unmistakable. Investigators may observe physical affection or other conduct that provides a relatively clear answer. Other times, what we document may be less definitive—a meeting, an extended period spent together, repeated contact, or a pattern of activity that the client did not previously know about.

That distinction is important. An investigator should not turn an observation into something more than it is simply because a client suspects infidelity. If we observe two people entering a restaurant together, that is what we report. If we observe them holding hands or kissing, we report that. If we cannot see what occurs after they enter a particular location, we should not claim that we can.

Over the course of an investigation, however, individual observations can begin to form a pattern. A single meeting may raise questions. Repeated meetings, consistent locations, extended periods together, or displays of affection may provide considerably more information when viewed together than any one observation would provide by itself.

Ultimately, the investigator’s job is not to manufacture the answer the client is hoping for—or fearing. It is to document what actually occurs and allow the evidence to speak for itself.

Documenting Facts Without Making Assumptions

As investigators, we have to separate what we suspect may be occurring from what we can actually establish.

Suppose we follow a married woman to a restaurant where she meets another man. Our investigator enters the restaurant and documents them sitting together for two hours while having lunch or coffee. The client recognizes the man as his wife’s former boyfriend.

That information may be extremely significant to the client. He may be very unhappy that his wife is secretly meeting a former boyfriend.

But does the fact that two people had lunch together establish that an infidelity occurred?

No.

There are still possible explanations for what we observed. She could say that she happened to encounter him and they decided to have lunch. Whether the client believes that explanation is a different question. More importantly, determining whether that explanation is believable is not the investigator’s responsibility.

Our responsibility as investigators is to accurately document what occurred. We can establish that the two people met, where they met, how long they remained together, and whatever interaction we were able to lawfully observe and document. We should not characterize conduct as something more than the evidence actually establishes.

That distinction becomes particularly important when surveillance moves from activity we can observe in public to activity that occurs outside our view.

The circumstances become considerably different when investigators document two people entering a hotel or motel together and emerging several hours later. We have documented that type of activity on numerous occasions. Those circumstances may understandably be extremely significant to a client, but we still report what we actually observed rather than claim to know what occurred while the individuals were outside our view.

Sometimes there is additional observable evidence. The individuals may kiss before entering or after leaving. They may embrace or hold hands. At other times, there may be no public display of affection at all.

If we observe a kiss, we document a kiss. If two people enter a motel and emerge several hours later, we document their arrival, their departure, the amount of time involved, and any other relevant activity we actually observed. We do not need to embellish those facts or make assumptions about what occurred outside our view.

The client can then evaluate that evidence in the context of everything they already know about their relationship. In many cases, the client knows facts and circumstances about the relationship that we do not. Our role is to provide the additional information developed through the investigation.

Why Photographic and Video Evidence Matters

An investigator’s observations can themselves constitute evidence. An investigator may also be called upon to testify about what he or she personally observed during an investigation. Whenever circumstances permit, however, I want those observations supported by photographs or video. There is an obvious reason for that.

If I tell a client that our investigators observed their spouse meeting another person, that information is important. If I can also provide photographs or video documenting the meeting, the client does not have to rely solely on my description of what occurred.

The evidence can speak for itself.

Photographs and video can also preserve details that may become important later—the identity of another person, a vehicle, a location, the time individuals arrived or departed, or the nature of an interaction between them.

We use different equipment depending upon the circumstances. Our investigators use high-quality 4K video cameras capable of obtaining useful images from considerable distances. We also use cell phones when circumstances make a traditional camera impractical or unnecessarily conspicuous, and we have other discreet camera equipment available when appropriate.

The equipment itself is not what makes an investigation successful. Knowing when, where, and how to use it is what matters. The best camera available is of little value if using it at the wrong moment exposes the surveillance. There are times when maintaining the investigation is more important than obtaining a particular photograph or piece of video.

There are occasions when the evidence becomes considerably less ambiguous.

In one investigation, our investigators followed a subject throughout the day as he traveled to different locations in connection with his work. Eventually, the subject met a woman and entered her vehicle. The vehicle was then driven to a secluded but publicly accessible location.

The windows were heavily tinted, which initially made it difficult to determine exactly what was occurring inside.

From a lawful public vantage point, however, our investigators were eventually able to document activity visible through the vehicle windows that provided compelling evidence of a sexual encounter between the occupants. As the encounter concluded, the woman opened the vehicle door, allowing investigators to obtain a clear image of her as well.

The client was subsequently able to identify the woman.

That is obviously a very different evidentiary situation from photographing two people having lunch together.

There was very little ambiguity about what our investigators had documented. More importantly, the client did not have to rely solely upon an investigator’s description of what had occurred. The activity had been preserved through video evidence that the client could see and evaluate for herself.

That does not mean every successful infidelity investigation must produce similarly definitive video. Often it does not. The purpose of photographic and video evidence is to document, as accurately as circumstances permit, what investigators are lawfully able to observe. Sometimes that evidence answers the client’s question immediately. At other times, it becomes one part of a larger pattern of documented activity.

Either way, the objective remains the same: document what actually occurred without compromising the investigation or attempting to make the evidence say more than it does.

Sometimes Evidence Develops as a Pattern

Not every investigation produces one definitive photograph.

Sometimes the significance of an investigation comes from a pattern that develops over time.

An investigator may document repeated meetings between the same two people. We may observe them entering a residence or hotel together on multiple occasions. There may be physical affection. There may be extended periods during which the individuals remain together under circumstances that are inconsistent with what the client has been told.

Each observation becomes another piece of the overall picture. An individual event may have several possible explanations. When similar activity occurs repeatedly, however, those individual observations can begin to take on greater significance when considered together.

That is why investigators have to remain objective throughout the process. We are not in the field trying to turn every interaction into evidence of infidelity. We are documenting behavior and allowing the facts to develop. We cannot begin with the client’s suspicion and then try to make everything we observe fit that suspicion.

Many clients tell us that before they ever contacted a private investigator, they simply felt that something in their relationship had changed. Their partner’s schedule changed. Their behavior changed. Their use of their telephone changed. Something did not feel right.

Sometimes an investigation confirms those suspicions. Sometimes it does not. And sometimes the investigation develops information that is significant to the client without providing one definitive answer.

There are also clients who have been repeatedly told by their partner that they are imagining things or overreacting. Even when evidence is eventually obtained, accepting what that evidence means can be emotionally difficult. Sometimes people want to believe the explanation they are being given because the alternative is painful.

That is another reason objective documentation is so important. The client does not have to rely solely upon suspicion, memory, or competing explanations. They can evaluate what investigators actually observed and documented.

Our job is not to tell a client what they should believe about their relationship. Our job is to document what actually occurs and provide them with the best evidence reasonably available.

Ultimately, what one client considers sufficient evidence may not satisfy another. But whether an investigation confirms infidelity, raises additional questions, or does not document the suspected activity during the periods when surveillance was conducted, our responsibility remains the same:

Follow the facts, document what we observe, and report the evidence objectively.

What Happens When Surveillance Doesn’t Go as Planned?

Even a carefully planned infidelity investigation can encounter unexpected challenges, including traffic delays, sudden changes in a subject’s movements, difficult surveillance locations, or the loss of visual contact.

That doesn’t mean planning isn’t important. A good investigative plan establishes the parameters of an investigation and gives investigators a strategy before they enter the field. But no investigator should expect that plan to remain unchanged once surveillance begins.

People are unpredictable. Traffic is unpredictable. Locations can be different from what you anticipated. A subject may leave earlier than expected, travel somewhere nobody anticipated, suddenly change direction, or do something that requires investigators to make an immediate decision.

That is where experience becomes extremely important.

A good surveillance investigator has to be able to think on his or her feet. When circumstances change, you cannot become paralyzed because what is happening no longer resembles the plan you developed in the office. The original plan gives you a starting point, but experience allows you to recognize when that plan needs to change.

Sometimes there may be three reasonable choices—A, B, or C—and no time to debate which one is perfect. The investigator has to assess what is happening, make the best decision available, communicate with the other investigator, and act. The decision may not become obvious until afterward. In the field, investigators often have only seconds to evaluate the circumstances and determine which option gives them the best opportunity to continue the investigation without unnecessarily exposing the surveillance.

The situation may require investigators to change positions, separate and cover different locations, abandon one approach and establish another, or simply recognize that maintaining surveillance at that moment would create an unacceptable risk of detection. Sometimes the correct decision is to create distance or even temporarily lose visual contact rather than make a movement that could compromise the remainder of the investigation.

That ability to adapt is one of the differences between simply following someone and conducting professional surveillance. Planning matters, but so does knowing when circumstances require you to depart from the plan.

Being Present Is Not the Same as Conducting an Investigation

There is a significant difference between simply being present during a surveillance assignment and actively attempting to obtain useful evidence.

I saw an example of this in an investigation that had nothing to do with infidelity but nevertheless demonstrated an important surveillance principle.

Our firm became involved in a significant personal injury investigation after another investigative company had previously conducted surveillance. I reviewed the earlier investigator’s reports.

The investigator had positioned a vehicle immediately adjacent to the subject’s residence. When the subject eventually left with another individual, the investigator followed them to a department store and obtained several photographs inside.

Technically, surveillance had been conducted. The investigator could document that he had been there and that the subject had gone to the store.

But the surveillance produced very little useful evidence concerning the issue that was actually being investigated.

When our firm subsequently handled the assignment, I placed one of our most experienced surveillance investigators on the case. He evaluated the location differently and developed a surveillance position that allowed him to remain considerably less conspicuous while still maintaining the ability to document the subject’s activities.

The difference in the evidence obtained was substantial. Not because anyone could have known beforehand exactly what the subject would do, but because the investigator was continually working toward the objective of the assignment and positioning himself to document relevant activity if the opportunity developed.

The lesson wasn’t that the first investigator should somehow have guaranteed a successful result. No investigator can do that.

The lesson was that private investigations should be results-driven.

An investigator isn’t being paid simply to sit in a vehicle for six hours and demonstrate afterward that he or she was present. The objective is to put yourself in the best reasonable position to obtain evidence relevant to the client’s investigation. That requires continually evaluating what is happening, considering what may happen next, and adjusting the investigative approach when circumstances warrant it.

Sometimes, despite doing everything correctly, nothing happens. That is surveillance. A subject may remain inside a residence for the entire day, go to work and come directly home, or simply engage in no activity relevant to the investigation. An investigator cannot manufacture evidence that does not exist.

But the investigator should always be working toward the objective. There is an important difference between an investigation that produces no significant evidence because nothing relevant occurred and one that produces little evidence because opportunities to document activity were not recognized or pursued.

That distinction matters to the client, because surveillance time is ultimately the client’s money.

You Cannot Guarantee Success, But You Have to Pursue It

There is no legitimate 100-percent success rate in surveillance.

Anyone who has done this work long enough understands that.

But there is a difference between recognizing that reality and using it as an excuse. The fact that surveillance is unpredictable does not relieve an investigator of the responsibility to put themselves in the best reasonable position to succeed.

Our investigators approach every assignment intending to succeed. You prepare properly. You arrive with the equipment and clothing necessary for the conditions. You anticipate the weather. You understand that surveillance may involve long periods of discomfort and inactivity followed by a situation that changes in seconds.

Preparation also includes some very practical considerations. If we know an assignment may require us to remain in the field from early morning until late in the day, we prepare for that. We bring sufficient food and water, along with coolers, ice or reusable cooling packs when conditions require them. We make sure we have the equipment, clothing, batteries, and other supplies necessary to remain in the field for an extended period without unnecessarily leaving the surveillance.

That preparation also includes anticipating basic personal needs. An investigator assigned to maintain surveillance cannot simply leave an active position for ten or fifteen minutes and assume nothing will happen while they are gone. If the subject leaves during that period, the investigator may have no way of knowing when they departed or where they went. When two investigators are assigned, there may be opportunities for one investigator to provide temporary coverage when the other genuinely has to leave. Otherwise, investigators have to prepare themselves to remain in position. A foreseeable personal need should not become the reason an important portion of an investigation was missed.

From the client’s perspective, an investigator who leaves an assigned surveillance position uncovered is not conducting surveillance during that period.

It may be extremely hot. It may be freezing cold. The surveillance position may be uncomfortable.

None of those things changes why the investigator is there. After hours of inactivity, the most important development of the investigation may occur without warning. The investigator has to remain prepared to recognize it and react when it does. A subject who has remained inside a residence for six hours can walk out the door during the few minutes an unprepared investigator decides to leave.

You cannot guarantee a successful result, but you can control the effort, preparation, judgment, and experience you bring to the investigation. You can also control whether you remain focused on the objective and continue looking for reasonable opportunities to obtain the evidence the client hired you to develop.

That is what pursuing success means in surveillance. It does not mean promising an outcome. It means doing everything reasonably within your control to give the investigation the best opportunity to succeed.

What Happens When You Lose the Subject?

Sometimes, despite the best planning and surveillance techniques, investigators lose visual contact with a subject.

A traffic light may separate the vehicles. The subject may make an unexpected turn. Traffic conditions can change instantly. Another vehicle may move between the investigator and the subject at exactly the wrong moment. Or maintaining visual contact may require an investigator to make a movement that would be unsafe or unnecessarily risk exposing the surveillance. There are countless ways it can happen.

The response should not be panic.

It also should not be an attempt to immediately recover the subject at any cost. Frustration can cause an investigator to become too aggressive, drive unsafely, or make movements that draw attention. Sometimes the better decision is to accept that visual contact has been lost and immediately begin working on the most reasonable way to reestablish it.

As discussed earlier, part of our preparation involves identifying locations associated with the subject before surveillance begins. If we lose the subject, those locations immediately become part of our effort to relocate them.

When two investigators are assigned to a surveillance operation, they can divide their responsibilities. One investigator may check the subject’s workplace while the other checks a gym, residence, business, relative’s home, or another location identified during the planning stage.

Those decisions are not necessarily random. The direction the subject was traveling, the time of day, what we know about their routine, and where they were last observed may help determine which locations make the most sense to check first.

There is no guarantee the subject will be found at any of those locations. However, checking known destinations is considerably more effective than simply driving around aimlessly and hoping to encounter the subject again.

When that happens, the investigation does not simply resume automatically. Investigators still have to consider where and how the subject was relocated and establish surveillance in a way that does not unnecessarily draw attention to the fact that the same vehicles have reappeared.

The important point is that losing visual contact does not necessarily mean that the investigation is over. It means the circumstances have changed, and the investigators must adjust their strategy.

Losing a subject is one of the realities of surveillance. No amount of experience can eliminate that possibility. Experience matters in what happens next—remaining composed, using the information developed before and during the investigation, and making reasonable decisions that give investigators the best opportunity to reestablish surveillance without creating an even larger problem.

No Investigation Is Worth Driving Recklessly

There is also a point where an investigator has to recognize that maintaining surveillance is not worth creating a danger to other people.

Infidelity investigations are extremely important to the clients who hire us. They may affect relationships, families, financial decisions, and major decisions about someone’s future.

But we are not going to drive recklessly or put members of the public in danger simply because we do not want to lose a subject. That means we are not going to run a red light, make an unsafe turn, travel at an unreasonable speed, or make some other dangerous maneuver simply because the subject did it and we are trying to stay with them.

Sometimes you have to let the person go.

That can be frustrating, particularly when investigators have successfully maintained surveillance for a considerable period. But good judgment is part of being a professional investigator and an important component of every surveillance operation. Knowing when not to pursue a subject can require just as much judgment as knowing how to maintain surveillance.

The objective is to obtain evidence – not create another problem while trying to obtain it. No photograph, video, or piece of evidence is worth causing an accident or injuring someone in order to obtain it.

Experience Matters When the Plan Changes

Surveillance is a skill that develops through experience.

New investigators have to learn it, just as experienced investigators once had to learn it. But I believe that learning should take place alongside investigators who already know how to conduct surveillance. There are aspects of surveillance that can be taught in advance, but there is no substitute for actually being in the field and watching experienced investigators respond as circumstances develop.

I would never intentionally send two inexperienced investigators into the field together on a mobile surveillance assignment.

When we have trained a new investigator on an assignment that normally requires two investigators, I have used three. The two experienced investigators conduct the assignment while the newer investigator gains actual field experience working alongside them. That allows the newer investigator to participate in a real surveillance operation without making the client’s investigation dependent upon two people who are still learning the fundamentals.

The client is not charged simply because I decided to add another investigator for training purposes. That additional training cost is ours.

There is a reason for that. The client hired us to conduct an investigation, not to finance the training of one of our investigators.

When something unexpected happens during surveillance, there often isn’t time for an investigator to stop and figure out the fundamentals. Decisions sometimes have to be made immediately. A subject may make an unexpected turn, suddenly change speed, enter a location investigators did not anticipate, or do something that requires the surveillance team to reposition within seconds. An inexperienced investigator may understand the theory of what should happen. Experience helps an investigator recognize what is happening and respond without having to work through every basic decision for the first time.

Experience also teaches restraint. The correct response is not always to get closer, follow every turn, or react immediately. Sometimes the experienced decision is to create distance, allow the other investigator to assume the better position, or accept temporarily losing visual contact rather than risk exposing the surveillance or creating an unsafe situation.

The plan gives investigators a starting point. Experience is what allows them to adapt when reality changes the plan.

What a Private Investigator Can – and Cannot – Legally Do During an Infidelity Investigation

In New Jersey, private investigators can conduct lawful surveillance, observe activities in public places, and document evidence through photographs and video when legally permitted. However, they cannot trespass, unlawfully access private communications, or disregard an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy.

That begins before an investigator ever enters the field. From the initial client consultation and investigative planning through surveillance and the collection of evidence, a professional private investigator has to understand not only what may be useful to a client, but what investigators are legally permitted to do.

In New Jersey, private investigators are required to conduct their investigations within the boundaries of the law. Understanding those legal limitations is an essential part of providing professional investigative services. Being licensed as a private investigator does not provide special authority to disregard privacy protections, bypass security measures, or obtain information through methods that would otherwise be unlawful.

Sometimes prospective clients ask whether we can access a spouse’s telephone, obtain private text messages, get into an email account, bypass passwords, or otherwise gain access to private electronic information. The answer is no.

I understand why people ask. They are looking for answers, and accessing someone’s telephone or email might appear to provide those answers much more quickly and inexpensively than conducting surveillance.

But a less expensive or easier method does not make an unlawful method permissible.

If someone asks us to obtain information through unauthorized access to a telephone, computer, email account, or other private electronic information, we explain that we cannot do it. That is different from a client providing information that they already lawfully possess or are otherwise legally authorized to access. When questions arise concerning whether particular information may lawfully be obtained, accessed, or used, those questions may need to be addressed by the client’s attorney rather than decided by the investigator.

Occasionally, someone will tell us that they have found another person or company claiming that they can provide that type of service. My response is straightforward: perhaps that is the company they should speak with. We are going to conduct our investigation lawfully. We are not going to expose our client—or ourselves—to unnecessary legal consequences simply to obtain an assignment.

There is also a practical reason for taking that position. Evidence is of little value to a client if the method used to obtain it creates an entirely new legal problem. The objective of an infidelity investigation is to develop useful information and evidence through lawful investigative methods—not to create additional problems for the people who hired us.

Statue of justice

What Investigators Can Observe and Document

Traditional surveillance generally involves observing and documenting activities that occur in locations where investigators can lawfully be present.

In New Jersey, an investigator may conduct surveillance from a lawful location and document activities occurring in public view. We routinely conduct surveillance on public streets and follow subjects as they travel on public roadways. Much of professional surveillance is based upon a fairly straightforward principle: investigators observe what is visible from places where they are legally entitled to be.

Surveillance may also continue into locations that are open to the public. If a subject enters a restaurant, shopping mall, store, bar, or similar public establishment, circumstances may permit an investigator to enter as well. Investigators can observe what occurs around them and, when lawful and appropriate, document relevant activity using photographic or video equipment.

We have obtained evidence in restaurants, stores, shopping centers, parking areas, and many other locations open to the public. Depending upon the circumstances, that evidence might document who a subject meets, how long they remain together, where they travel, or interactions that occur openly and can be observed from a lawful position.

Being in a location that is generally open to the public, however, does not mean that every area within that location is public or that an investigator has an unrestricted right to photograph or record anything that occurs there. Investigators still have to consider the particular location, the manner in which the information is being obtained, and whether the activity being documented is occurring under circumstances in which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

There is an important distinction between documenting what someone openly does in a public setting and deliberately intruding into an area where that person reasonably expects privacy. That distinction becomes particularly important when an investigation involves private property, private areas within otherwise public establishments, or attempts to observe activity that is not exposed to public view.

Private Property and Expectations of Privacy

The fact that investigators possess sophisticated camera equipment does not give them permission to use that equipment however they choose.

For example, we are not going to climb over a fence or trespass onto private property to obtain a better view of someone’s backyard. Nor are we going to deliberately use a powerful telephoto lens to peer through the window of a private room simply because our equipment is technically capable of doing it. The ability to obtain an image does not, by itself, mean that an investigator should or lawfully may obtain it.

In New Jersey, there may be activity associated with a residence that is plainly observable from a lawful public vantage point. An investigator can document activities that are lawfully observable under the circumstances. For example, activity occurring in a driveway, front yard, or other area that is openly visible from a public street may present a very different situation from activity occurring inside a private residence or within an area deliberately shielded from public observation. But investigators must remain conscious of the distinction between observing what is exposed to public view and using technology or physical intrusion to invade an area intended to remain private.

That distinction is particularly important with modern photographic equipment. Cameras may allow investigators to obtain images from substantial distances, but technology should not be used as a means of overcoming privacy that could not otherwise lawfully be invaded.

The same principle applies throughout an investigation: our objective is to obtain the best evidence we lawfully can—not to obtain evidence at any cost.

There can also be legitimate investigative reasons for approaching a residence during an investigation. Under appropriate circumstances, for example, an investigator may approach a front door and make an inquiry just as another member of the public might. Whether that is appropriate depends upon the circumstances and the purpose of the investigation. Approaching an area ordinarily open to visitors for a legitimate inquiry is very different from entering other areas of private property or remaining there for the purpose of conducting covert surveillance.

Professional surveillance depends as much upon recognizing where the legal boundaries are as it does upon knowing how to obtain evidence within those boundaries.

Can a Private Investigator Legally Record Conversations in New Jersey?

Clients also sometimes ask about recording conversations.

Recording laws can be complicated and can vary depending upon the state and the circumstances. New Jersey law currently (as of Sept 13, 2026) permits certain recordings when the person making the recording is a party to the conversation or one of the parties has given prior consent. However, legislation has been introduced in New Jersey that, if enacted, would change the consent requirements applicable to certain recordings.

For that reason, neither clients nor investigators should assume that something they have heard about recording laws—or something that may have been lawful in the past—necessarily reflects the law in effect when an investigation is conducted.

There is also an important distinction between recording a conversation in which the person making the recording is actually participating and secretly intercepting a private conversation between other people. Those situations can present very different legal issues.

Because recording laws can vary from state to state and can change over time, investigators need to understand the law applicable at the time and place of the recording. An investigation may also involve more than one state, creating additional legal considerations. When there is a question about whether a particular conversation may lawfully be recorded, we believe that question should be addressed by an attorney before the recording is made.

The important point for a prospective client is that hiring a private investigator does not give either the investigator or the client special authority to intercept private communications.

Our responsibility is to conduct investigations within the law as it exists at the time the investigation is performed.

Technology Does Not Eliminate Legal Boundaries

Technology available to investigators has changed dramatically over the years.

Cameras are smaller and considerably more powerful. Cell phones can capture excellent photographs and video. Enormous amounts of information can be found electronically. Investigators also have access to technologies and information sources that would have been difficult to imagine earlier in my career.

But technology does not eliminate legal boundaries.

Just because technology makes something possible does not mean that it is lawful—or that a professional investigator should do it. Technical capability and legal authority are two very different things. A device may be capable of obtaining information, an online service may claim that information can be obtained, or software may make access technically possible. None of that, by itself, establishes that an investigator is legally permitted to obtain or use the information in that manner.

There are times when a prospective client may be disappointed when we tell them that something they want us to do is not permissible. I would rather lose that investigation than mislead someone about what we can legally accomplish.

A legitimate private investigator should never promise an unlawful shortcut simply to obtain a client’s business. Nor should an investigator allow new technology to become a substitute for professional judgment. Technology is a tool. The investigator remains responsible for deciding whether and how that tool can lawfully and appropriately be used.

Our responsibility is to gather evidence professionally, objectively, and lawfully. Evidence obtained during an infidelity investigation is supposed to help a client make decisions about their future. The investigation should not create an entirely new legal problem for the client in the process.

Technology will continue to change. The investigator’s responsibility to operate within the law does not.

How to Choose a New Jersey Private Investigator for an Infidelity Investigation

Choosing a private investigator for an infidelity investigation is a much more important decision than many people initially realize.

When choosing a private investigator in New Jersey, look for proper licensing, relevant surveillance experience, transparent fees, and a clear explanation of how your investigation will be conducted. Ask who will actually perform the surveillance, how evidence will be documented, and what results you can reasonably expect. Be cautious of investigators who guarantee outcomes or pressure you to make an immediate decision.

One thing that has always surprised me is how frequently prospective clients will contact a private investigation agency and immediately begin discussing some of the most intimate details of their lives without knowing very much about the people they are speaking with.

Infidelity investigations involve extraordinarily personal information. Clients may discuss their marriage or relationship, their children, their finances, their spouse’s behavior, their own fears and suspicions, and sometimes extremely private aspects of their relationship. They may also provide addresses, schedules, photographs, vehicle information, travel plans, and other details about their family and daily lives that they would ordinarily never provide to a stranger.

These conversations occur with people from every walk of life. Over the years, we have spoken with people from across the country and from virtually every socioeconomic and professional background. Infidelity doesn’t distinguish between occupations, income levels, or social status.

Yet regardless of someone’s background, the same basic issue exists: you are placing a considerable amount of trust in the investigator you hire. You are trusting that person not only with sensitive information, but also with an investigation that may influence important personal, family, financial, or legal decisions.

Before sharing that information with a private investigator, I believe you should know who you are talking to.

That does not mean simply knowing the name of the company that appeared in a search result or advertisement. A prospective client should take some time to understand who will actually be handling their investigation, what experience they have, and whether the agency operates in a professional manner.

The investigator you choose matters.

Bob Cowan - Owner of Cowan Investigations, a New Jersey Private Investigator

Research the Investigator Before You Call

Start by researching the investigator or agency.

Look at the firm’s website. Look at the investigator’s professional background. Search their name and the agency’s name. Determine whether there is a legitimate professional history and digital footprint that supports what they claim about themselves.

Not every competent investigator will have an extensive online presence. Someone may be relatively new to operating their own agency while having substantial investigative experience elsewhere. A limited digital footprint by itself doesn’t mean someone isn’t qualified.

But when information is available, look at it.

You are potentially going to tell this person things you haven’t told friends, family members, or perhaps anyone else. You may ultimately entrust that investigator with extremely sensitive information about your relationship and family.

Before making that call, take a few minutes to determine who you are actually dealing with.

Ask About the Investigator’s Experience

Don’t simply ask how many years the agency has been in business. Ask where the investigator’s experience actually came from.

Did the investigator previously work for another private investigation agency? How much surveillance experience do they have? Have they handled infidelity investigations before? Did they come from law enforcement or another investigative profession?

In my opinion, substantial law-enforcement experience can be a significant advantage in this work.

Law enforcement and private investigation are certainly not identical professions, and a law-enforcement background alone does not automatically make someone a good private investigator. But police officers and supervisors can spend an entire career dealing with people, evaluating rapidly changing situations, resolving problems, conducting investigations, making decisions under pressure, and handling difficult interpersonal situations.

Those skills can transfer extremely well to private investigations.

Whatever the investigator’s background may be, the prospective client should understand the experience that person will actually bring to the investigation.

Who Is Actually Going to Conduct My Surveillance?

The person who answers the telephone or owns the agency may not necessarily be the investigator who goes into the field.

How many investigators does the agency have available? Who will be assigned to your case? What experience do those investigators have? Does the agency regularly work with those investigators? How are assignments supervised?

An agency may use employees, other licensed investigators, or other properly authorized investigative resources depending upon its business model and applicable law. The employment classification itself isn’t necessarily what determines the quality of the investigation.

What matters to the client is knowing who is doing the work, whether that person is qualified to do it, and who is responsible for supervising the investigation.

I think those are entirely reasonable questions when someone is preparing to spend thousands of dollars on an investigation.

Ask How the Surveillance Will Be Staffed

If the investigation is likely to involve mobile surveillance, ask how many investigators the agency recommends.

If they recommend one investigator, ask why.

If they recommend two, ask them to explain why two are necessary.

As discussed earlier in this article, I strongly believe that mobile surveillance frequently requires two investigators. Following a subject through traffic, intersections, highways, parking facilities, and changing environments can be extremely difficult with a single surveillance vehicle.

The important thing is that the investigator should be able to explain the staffing recommendation based upon the circumstances of your investigation.

You shouldn’t simply be told, “This is how we do it.”

You are paying for the investigation. You are entitled to understand why it is being conducted that way.

How to Verify a Private Investigator’s License in New Jersey

Determine whether the investigator or agency is properly licensed where licensing is required.

In New Jersey, private detective agencies are licensed and regulated through the New Jersey State Police. A prospective client can ask an agency about its licensing and independently verify licensing information through the appropriate regulatory authority.

This is a basic step, but an important one.

Understand the Retainer and Fee Structure

Don’t select an investigator solely by comparing hourly rates.

Cost obviously matters. Most clients have a budget, and private investigations can become expensive. But the lowest hourly rate does not necessarily produce the least expensive investigation.

An inexperienced investigator who accomplishes very little over multiple surveillance periods can ultimately cost a client considerably more than an experienced investigator charging a higher hourly rate.

Before retaining an agency, understand exactly how you will be charged.

Ask about the retainer. How much is required? How is investigative time billed against it? What other expenses may be charged? What happens to unused retainer funds? Are there minimum surveillance periods? How is travel handled? When could additional funds be required?

Ask to review the written retainer agreement before committing to the investigation.

This business side of the decision may feel relatively unimportant when someone is emotionally consumed with the possibility that their partner is cheating. But it matters.

You should understand the financial agreement you are entering into before the investigation begins.

Ask How Evidence Will Be Documented

Ask the investigator what equipment is available and how evidence will be documented.

What type of photographic and video equipment do the investigators use? Do they have high-quality cameras capable of documenting activity from appropriate distances? What equipment might they use inside a restaurant or dark bar where pulling out a traditional video camera would immediately attract attention? Are investigators equipped to adapt to different environments?

Sophisticated equipment doesn’t make someone a good investigator. Experience and judgment remain considerably more important.

But an experienced investigator should have the appropriate equipment available and be able to explain how evidence is normally documented.

Also ask what you will receive when the investigation is finished.

Will you receive photographs? Video? A written investigative report if you need one? How are the results communicated?

Those questions should be answered before the investigation begins, not afterward.

Be Wary of Guarantees

Ask what happens if surveillance does not produce the answer you expected on the first attempt.

No legitimate investigator can guarantee that a subject will engage in a particular activity simply because surveillance is being conducted that day.

Sometimes the absence of suspected activity is itself part of what the investigation establishes. Sometimes additional surveillance is warranted. Sometimes the information developed during the first surveillance period helps determine when another attempt should occur.

What I would be wary of is an investigator who promises a predetermined result.

An investigator can commit to preparing properly, using professional investigative techniques, making reasonable efforts to maintain surveillance, and accurately reporting what is observed.

The investigator cannot honestly promise what the subject is going to do.

Be Wary of Pressure and Fear-Based Sales Tactics

There is another factor I believe prospective clients should consider when choosing a private investigator: how they are treated before they ever agree to hire the agency.

People considering a cheating spouse investigation are often already in an extremely emotional state. They may be frightened about what is happening in their relationship, uncertain about what to do, and anxious to obtain answers.

That vulnerability should never be used as a sales technique.

Over the years, I have become aware of situations in which prospective clients felt pressured to immediately begin an investigation because they were told, in substance, that if they waited, they might miss the opportunity to catch their partner doing something that particular weekend or on a particular day.

Unless there is actual information supporting that conclusion, prospective clients should be very cautious about that type of pressure.

A private investigator can certainly explain that timing matters. If the information provided by the client identifies a particular day, event, trip, meeting, or unexplained period of time that creates a legitimate investigative opportunity, the investigator should explain why that opportunity may be important.

That is very different from creating urgency simply to persuade an emotionally distressed person to sign a retainer agreement.

An investigator should help a prospective client evaluate the information they have—not intensify their fears.

Sometimes the appropriate recommendation is to begin surveillance quickly. Sometimes it is to wait and gather additional information. As discussed earlier, there are occasions when the best advice may be to keep track of a partner’s schedule for another week or two and call back when a clearer pattern develops.

Prospective clients should be particularly cautious of anyone who seems more interested in getting a retainer immediately than in understanding whether the proposed investigation actually makes sense.

There is nothing wrong with speaking with more than one investigative agency before making a decision. Ask questions. Compare approaches and fees. Pay attention not only to what investigators tell you they can do, but also to how they respond when you are uncertain about moving forward.

A professional investigator should be willing to explain the options and allow the client to make an informed decision.

Fear should never be the reason someone is pressured into hiring a private investigator.

You are not simply hiring someone to sit in a car and watch another person.

You are hiring someone to obtain information that may influence some of the most important personal, family, legal, and financial decisions you will ever make.

Choose accordingly.

What Happens After an Infidelity Investigation Is Over?

After an infidelity investigation, clients receive the findings and available evidence, which may include photographs, video, and an investigative report.

In my experience, there are generally three possible outcomes.

The first is that the investigation develops evidence supporting the client’s suspicions. The second is that the investigation develops evidence that points in another direction and may provide an explanation for behavior the client believed was related to infidelity. The third is that the investigation remains inconclusive. We may simply not have observed enough during the periods of surveillance to establish what was actually happening, or the client’s available budget may not permit additional surveillance.

That distinction is important because, as I said at the beginning of this article, an investigator’s responsibility is not to prove that someone is cheating. Our responsibility is to determine what the evidence actually establishes.

Sometimes the Answer Is Something Completely Different

There have been investigations where a client’s suspicions were understandable, but what the investigation ultimately revealed had nothing to do with infidelity.

In one investigation, for example, a client was concerned about unexplained activity involving a partner who was spending significant periods of time in Atlantic City. The circumstances caused the client to suspect that another person might be involved.

Our investigation ultimately pointed in an entirely different direction.

We did not develop evidence of an affair. Instead, the surveillance established that the unexplained activity was associated with gambling.

The client had correctly recognized that something about the partner’s behavior had changed and that there were periods of time that weren’t being adequately explained. The client’s conclusion about why it was happening, however, was different from what the investigation established.

That is a good example of why an investigator cannot begin an investigation assuming the client’s suspicions are correct.

Follow the evidence.

Sometimes it takes you exactly where the client expected it would. Sometimes it takes you somewhere completely different.

When the Evidence Supports the Client’s Suspicions

When we do obtain evidence supporting the client’s suspicions, the relevant photographs, video, and investigative information are reviewed and the client is advised of what was documented.

At that point, Liz is often the person who discusses the findings with the client. Having been their primary point of contact throughout the investigation, she understands their circumstances and recognizes how difficult receiving those results may be.

What the Client Does With the Answer Is Their Decision

Once we provide the results, however, an important boundary remains.

We investigate. The client decides what happens next.

A client may decide to confront their partner. They may speak with an attorney. They may decide to end the relationship. They may try to repair it. They may take some time before doing anything at all.

Those are extraordinarily personal decisions, and they belong to the client.

If a client asks Liz for her thoughts, she can certainly speak with them based upon the experience she has gained from years of conversations with people who have found themselves in similar situations. But neither of us is there to tell someone what they should do with their marriage, relationship, or family.

Our responsibility is to provide reliable investigative information so that whatever decision the client ultimately makes is based upon facts rather than uncertainty.

Why Communication Changes Once the Investigation Ends

There is something that happens during many of these investigations that people outside this profession probably never see.

For some clients, the relationship that develops with the person handling their case becomes much more important than simply having someone available to answer questions about an investigation.

By the time a person calls a private investigator, they may have been living with their suspicions for weeks or months. They may not feel comfortable discussing what is happening with their family or friends. There may be children involved. They may be frightened about what could happen to their marriage, their family, or their future. Some have been repeatedly told by their partner that their suspicions are unreasonable or that they are imagining what they are seeing.

Then they call Liz.

I have been in our office and heard many of these conversations over the years. Some clients are crying. Some are angry. Some are confused. Others simply need to talk to someone who understands what they are going through and who isn’t personally involved in their family or relationship.

Liz listens to them.

As a result, communication can become frequent. A client may call with new information about the investigation, but sometimes they call because they need to talk. They may be having a particularly difficult day or have had another confrontation with their partner. Something may have happened that they don’t know how to interpret. Sometimes they simply need to tell someone what is happening.

Liz has a great deal of empathy for people in those circumstances, and over the course of an investigation a genuine rapport can develop.

At the same time, she has to maintain an important boundary. She can listen and communicate with the client, but during active surveillance she cannot allow the client’s emotions or desire for immediate information to compromise the investigation. That is one of the reasons we don’t provide live locations or a running account of what our investigators are observing in the field.

For a period of time, however, we—and particularly Liz—can become a significant part of that person’s life.

And then something rather remarkable happens.

The investigation ends.

The photographs and other evidence are provided. The client receives whatever answers the investigation was able to establish. The frequent telephone calls stop.

And the office becomes quiet.

The person who may have called repeatedly, who cried on the telephone, who shared extraordinarily personal details about their relationship, and who relied upon Liz as someone they could speak with during an extremely difficult period now has to move forward with their life.

In many ways, that silence is exactly what should happen.

Our purpose was never to become a permanent part of the client’s life. We were there during a period when they needed information, support through the investigative process, and someone they trusted to communicate with them honestly.

Some clients never call again. Others contact Liz months or even years later to tell her what happened. Occasionally, someone who first called our office frightened and overwhelmed reaches out much later simply to say that they are doing well.

Those calls mean something to us.

Because behind all of the surveillance, cameras, vehicles, reports, and evidence discussed throughout this article, there is something very easy to forget: There is a person and sometimes, for a relatively brief period in that person’s life, we are among the very few people who know exactly what they are going through.

The Investigator’s Responsibility Ends With the Facts

That human side of an investigation does not change our fundamental responsibility.

Whether an investigation confirms the client’s suspicions, points toward an entirely different explanation, or ends without enough evidence to reach a definitive conclusion, we have to report what we actually found.

We cannot turn an inconclusive investigation into a successful one simply because the client desperately wants an answer. We cannot interpret innocent activity as infidelity because that is what someone expected us to find. And when the evidence does establish something difficult, we cannot soften the facts to the point that they no longer accurately represent what occurred.

Our responsibility is to establish the facts as accurately, lawfully, and objectively as possible.

That is where an investigator’s responsibility ultimately ends.

What the client chooses to do with those facts belongs to them.

Two Perspectives: Final Thoughts from Robert Cowan and Elizabeth (Liz) Cowan

Before closing this article, we thought it would be helpful to offer two final perspectives: one from the investigator responsible for conducting the investigation and one from the person who often guides clients through their first phone call and remains their primary point of contact throughout the process.

Robert Cowan: Facts, Not Assumptions

After decades in law enforcement and private investigations, one of the most important lessons I’ve learned is that people should be very careful about jumping to conclusions.

Suspicion alone isn’t evidence.

An investigation can conclude in several different ways. It may confirm a client’s suspicions. It may establish that there isn’t enough evidence to confirm those suspicions. Or it may reveal that something entirely different is happening.

I remember one investigation in which a client was convinced that her husband was involved with another woman. His location repeatedly showed him in the same area, and she believed she knew exactly what was happening.

Two investigators conducted surveillance.

What we observed was very different from what the client expected.

On two separate evenings, the subject drove to an area near a public park, parked his vehicle, remained there for several hours, and appeared to spend the time reading inside the vehicle before eventually returning home.

We didn’t develop evidence that he was meeting another person.

What that case reinforced for me was something I’ve learned repeatedly throughout my career: observations and assumptions aren’t the same thing.

The investigation answered the question that brought the client to us, but it didn’t support the conclusion the client initially believed to be true.

Facts matter.

Assumptions may point someone toward an investigation, but they should never determine its outcome.

I also believe that choosing the right private investigator is one of the most important decisions a person can make when considering an investigation. Cost shouldn’t be the only consideration.

Research the investigator. Read the website. Ask questions. Learn about the firm’s experience. Understand who will actually be conducting the investigation.

Most importantly, understand that no ethical investigator can guarantee a particular outcome.

Our responsibility isn’t to confirm suspicions.

Our responsibility is to establish the facts and provide reliable information that allows a client to make informed decisions.

Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Robert Cowan, owner and licensed New Jersey private investigator at Cowan Investigations

Elizabeth (Liz) Cowan: The Person Behind the Investigation

After more than eleven years of speaking with clients, I’ve learned that every conversation is different.

Some people have gathered a great deal of information before they call. Others don’t know where to begin.

Some callers are calm and organized. Others are emotional, frightened, overwhelmed, or uncertain about what they should do next.

And that’s okay.

One of the first things I hear quite often is:

“I’ve never called a private investigator before.”

My response is usually very simple:

“That’s okay. Just tell me what’s going on.”

Then I listen.

I don’t expect someone to have all the answers before they call me. I don’t pressure anyone to move forward with an investigation, and I don’t expect every conversation to lead to one.

My job is to listen, ask questions, and help people understand what their options might be.

Sometimes a caller already has a great deal of information. Other times, they have very little. In some situations, I may suggest keeping a journal and paying closer attention to dates, times, schedules, and changes in routine. In other cases, I may explain what an investigation might look like based on the information they’ve provided.

Every situation is different, and every relationship is different.

I never know what I’m going to hear when I answer the telephone.

What I do know is that many of the people who call us are dealing with one of the most difficult periods of their lives. Some are worried about their relationships. Some are concerned about their children. Others simply have no one they feel comfortable talking to.

My goal is to make people feel comfortable enough to speak openly and honestly about what they’re experiencing.

I also want them to understand that they don’t have to make a decision during that first phone call.

I explain who we are, describe our experience, answer their questions, and explain how we approach investigations. Then I let them decide whether moving forward is the right decision for them.

Regardless of the outcome of an investigation, I hope every client feels that they were treated professionally, compassionately, and with empathy from beginning to end.

I hope they feel that they were heard.

I hope they feel that they always had someone they could contact and someone they could trust.

And I hope they know that whether the investigation confirmed their suspicions, did not support them, or simply raised additional questions, they were never treated as just another case file.

For me, that’s one of the most important parts of this work.

Need Assistance With an Infidelity Investigation in New Jersey?

If you suspect your spouse or partner may be unfaithful, Cowan Investigations can help you understand your options.

Contact our team to discuss your concerns, ask questions, and learn whether a professional infidelity investigation may be appropriate for your situation.

Your consultation will be handled confidentially.

Our Expertise At Your Disposal

If you, someone you know, or your client is in need of professional infidelity investigation services in New Jersey, our team at Cowan Investigations has the experience you need to do the job right the first time. Contact our team today to get started!

Contact Cowan Investigations

Cowan Investigations Logo

Cowan Investigations, LLC. Is licensed, bonded and fully insured to operate in the State of New Jersey.

Cowan Investigations, LLC. New Jersey State Agency License # 9364

Cowan Investigations, LLC. Is able to provide Asset Search and Background Check services in the state of Pennsylvania.

Member of New Jersey Private
Investigators Association

Navigation

Contact Our Team