One on One with Jed Davis

Davis: It's certainly not the same thing because first of all it's in the service of clients trying to assess what their risks are. Clients trying to get to the bottom of things is not the same thing necessarily as law enforcement trying to figure out whether there's a prosecutable case. There is a spectrum of assessment of risk [at companies], where there's a need for good investigative services that's not covered in the gamut of whether or not there's enough to charge somebody with a crime. That being said, much of the skill set I have acquired over the last twelve years as a prosecutor is transposable. Previously my client was the people of the United States arguing in front of a jury. But part of my skill set is to figure out the complex offense and distill it so that the essence of the details and where the risk factors are understandable to the client. [Then] the client can make a determination as to what they want to do.

Consulting: What happens when you discover a crime has been committed at a firm?

Davis: Kroll can help a client determine what its risks are and help a client decide what it wants to do with respect to bringing law enforcement in. Deciding whether or not law enforcement should be contacted depends on what you found out.

Consulting: Is it frustrating to not be able to go the extra step to see justice done?

Davis: I wouldn't say it's frustrating. I think that I'm anticipating that frequently the cases I'll be working on are ones that law enforcement will find of interest. The task for me in conducting [my] job search [was] to find the next step in my career that took advantage of what I've learned and has enough resemblance to what I've been doing that I don't find myself in the position that many prosecutors do; [saying] the job they had as a prosecutor…was the best job they'll ever have. My feeling is this is a logical step in my career as an investigator…helping clients to understand the risk and still take advantage of what I like to do, which is to get at the heart of a problem, figure out what occurred and help people understand it and how to respond to it.

Consulting: What do you anticipate will be your biggest challenge in this role?

Davis: I think if I say it's a challenge, I also say it's what I'm looking to do. Prosecutors have an extraordinary amount of discretion about the timing and the shaping of their cases. This is why I came to Kroll: Kroll is trying to investigative aggressively while always being very scrupulous about the ethical limits about what can and cannot be done in the service of the client. The timetable and the client's interest are those that are now my task to serve as opposed to the substantial discretion that prosecutors are given.

Consulting: Were you influenced by other former prosecutors who consult at Kroll?

It certainly was an example. There are a lot of great examples within Kroll and within its parent company [Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.] of prosecutors who have gone off and done this, so it was certainly an indication that there are possibilities here. But I should also add that while it's a little more unusual for ex-prosecutors to go to this kind of position than to go to a law firm, what I would say is that Kroll has pioneered a kind of investigation where we are often head to head with major law firms, and I think that Kroll has competitive advantages that really drew me to choose this particular path, [such as] databases, ex-law enforcement [contacts] and contacts worldwide, and it's often hard for law firms to match.