Violent crime rarely respects boundaries and neither should modern investigations.
The recent shootings at Brown University and near the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), allegedly carried out by the same individual across two states, highlight a core reality of modern investigations. Solving cases that span jurisdictions increasingly require national systems, cross-jurisdictional teamwork, policy-driven practices, and technology-enabled crime gun intelligence.
In complex violent-crime investigations, the challenge is rarely a lack of effort. More often, it is the speed at which verified information can be developed, shared, and acted upon across multiple agencies.
What began in Rhode Island, continued in Massachusetts, and ended at a storage facility in New Hampshire unfolded across multiple jurisdictions, generating fear across multiple communities and uncertainty for investigators attempting to determine whether the incidents were connected.
On December 13, 2025, Claudio Neves Valente was believed to have traveled from Miami, Florida, to Providence, Rhode Island, where he allegedly shot multiple students at Brown University, killing two. While law enforcement agencies were searching for an unidentified suspect in those murders, Valente traveled to Brookline, Massachusetts, two days later, where he killed a former classmate and professor affiliated with MIT.
At the time, investigators could not confirm whether the two shootings were related. The incidents were unusual, geographically separated, and occurred within a compressed timeframe, but suspicion alone was not enough to guide investigative decisions.
That uncertainty began to resolve when investigators recovered two firearms from a New Hampshire storage facility during the course of their investigation, and after discovering Valente’s body. He died from what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
From Recovery to Context
The recovery of the crime guns - two 9 mm pistols - in Salem, New Hampshire, by investigators was straightforward. What mattered was what followed: how quickly those firearms could be examined, compared, and placed into an investigative context.
The crime guns were processed through standard forensic workflows, including rapid DNA collection and analysis, fingerprint examination, and test firing. The resulting cartridge cases were submitted to the ATF’s National Integrated Ballistic Network (NIBIN), via the Connecticut State Police Forensic Science Laboratory, enabling examiners to electronically compare ballistic evidence across cases and jurisdictions at a national scale.
NIBIN did not disappoint. It immediately linked one of the recovered crime guns to the gun used in the Brown University shooting. The other matched the gun used in the murder of the MIT professor.
Only a centralized, virtual network operating at a national scale could support this level of speed, coordination, and efficiency across jurisdictions, across state lines, and across miles of landscape.
The rapid DNA analysis preliminarily linked Valente to evidence recovered at Brown University.
Where Problems Typically Appear in Cross-Jurisdictional Shootings
The Providence, Brookline, and Salem crime scenes were all supported by coordinated teams of local, state, and federal law enforcement, forensic specialists, prosecutors, and other professionals spanning four New England states: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Connecticut. Each agency operated within its established directives, standard operating procedures, and investigative tactics while contributing to a shared mission.
In such fast-moving investigations involving crime guns, particularly those spanning multiple jurisdictions, investigators routinely encounter three challenges:
- Fragmented evidence handling, where ballistic evidence is processed locally but is difficult to compare regionally
- Delays in confirmation prolong uncertainty about whether incidents are connected
- Information gaps between agencies, especially when crimes cross municipal or state boundaries
Central to addressing these gaps is NIBIN, a technology-driven system powered by LeadsOnline’s IBIS technology. NIBIN enables investigators nationwide to quickly share and compare forensic ballistic data. Since 1997, the network has generated more than one million investigative leads, helping law enforcement link crimes across jurisdictions and bring resolution to cases that might otherwise remain unsolved.
Most often, NIBIN leads authorities somewhere unexpected, a gun seized in a routine unlawful-possession case that is suddenly linked to a shooting that occurred weeks, months, or even years earlier, in the same jurisdiction or well beyond it. Here, NIBIN did not deliver a surprise.
Instead, what it delivered was speed, moving digitized ballistic evidence to investigators and forensic examiners across four states at the speed of electricity…or better said, the speed of electronic data transfer.
Ballistic analysis confirmed that the shell casings recovered at Brown University were fired from one firearm, while those recovered from the murder of MIT professor Nuno Loureiro were fired from a different firearm. This distinction immediately narrowed the investigative focus.
NIBIN, a nationwide program operating across all 50 states, provides investigators with timely insight from both an inclusion and exclusion perspective. Exclusion is just as critical to investigations as inclusion, allowing investigators to rule out connections as confidently as they confirm them.
Rather than debating theories or relying on assumptions, investigators can proceed based on verified evidence. In this case, the result was clear: two firearms, two crime scenes, one suspect.
How Crime Gun Intelligence Enables Clarity
Early in the investigation, identifying the suspect proved difficult due to limited and poor-quality security footage at Brown University. A citizen tip, combined with automated license plate reader (LPR) technology, provided a critical investigative breakthrough.
Using LPR data, Federal and state investigators tracked the suspect’s rented vehicle across state lines, ultimately leading them to the New Hampshire storage facility.
Together, LPR data, ballistic intelligence, and DNA analysis provided complementary answers, helping define how the crimes were carried out and who was responsible. This is crime gun intelligence in practice.
None of these tools replaced traditional investigative work. They accelerated it.
From Evidence to Actionable Intelligence
By providing a national, electronic, centralized method for sharing ballistic intelligence across Brown University Police, Rhode Island State Police, Massachusetts State Police, New Hampshire State Police, and Connecticut State Police, NIBIN reduced uncertainty both early in the investigation and as it progressed.
Without that capability, comparisons would have relied on slower, manual coordination between law enforcement agencies and laboratories. During that time, unanswered questions would persist, not only among investigators, but also in the public narrative surrounding the case.
The value of NIBIN lies not in delivering a single answer, but in providing a verified foundation investigators can trust. When combined with LPR data, DNA analysis, casework, and coordinated information sharing, ballistic intelligence helps agencies:
- Confirm or rule out links between incidents
- Align investigative resources appropriately
- Present defensible, evidence-based conclusions
These outcomes are especially important for prosecutors, who depend on clear forensic findings that withstand scrutiny.
A Practical Tool for Modern Investigations
As violent crime continues to extend beyond jurisdictional boundaries, investigations face increasing pressure to move faster and coordinate more effectively.
Indispensable tools like NIBIN enable agencies to operate at a pace consistent with modern investigative demands, reducing guesswork, minimizing delays, and supporting coordinated decision-making.
In today’s environment, effective crime gun intelligence is less about technology alone and more about how that technology integrates into established investigative processes and national information sharing initiatives. When implemented correctly, it becomes a practical enabler, helping investigators move from evidence to understanding with speed, accuracy, and confidence.
The pursuit of justice, resolution, and peace deserves nothing less.
