DOJ Declines to Prosecute FBI Agent Who Mishandled Classified Information, Gave Misleading Testimony, Provided False Information to IG

By Terence P. Jeffrey | May 23, 2018 | 4:42 PM EDT

FBI headquarters building in Washington. D.C. (FBI Photo)

(CNSNews.com) - The Department of Justice, according to the department’s Office of Inspector General, has declined to prosecute a now-retired FBI special agent (SA) who mishandled classified information, gave misleading testimony, had “contacts with several individuals appeared to be designed to improperly influence their prospective testimony” and provided the IG with false information.

“Criminal prosecution of the SA was declined,” the IG reported in an investigative summary of the case.

According to the Justice Department, the law governing inspector generals requires an IG to refer a case to a federal prosecutor when the IG discovers reasonable grounds to believe that federal law has been violated.

But it is then up to the prosecutor to decide whether to actually bring charges.

The DOJ IG published its “investigative summary” of the case involving the now-retired, not-prosecuted FBI special agent on April 30.

[This screen capture below shows a paragraph from the IG's investigative summary that lays out some of the misconduct the IG attributed to a now-retired FBI special agent.]

“The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated this investigation after receiving information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Inspection Division, alleging that an FBI Special Agent (SA), who has since retired, may have contacted witnesses during a federal criminal investigation for an improper purpose,” said the summary.

“The OIG found that the SA contacted individuals who he either knew were, or had reasonable belief would be witnesses in the criminal investigation and that the SA’s contacts with several individuals appeared to be designed to improperly influence their prospective testimony,” said the summary. “Accordingly, the OIG concluded that the SA’s contacts with the witnesses were improper and constituted misconduct.

“During the investigation, the OIG also found that the SA divulged law enforcement sensitive information to unauthorized individuals; misused his government issued electronic devices; provided misleading testimony during a related civil deposition; mishandled classified information; misused his position during contacts with local law enforcement officers; and provided false information to the OIG,” said the summary.

“Criminal prosecution of the SA was declined,” it continued.

“The OIG has completed its investigation and provided its report to the FBI,” it concluded.

“When the IG develops reasonable grounds to believe there has been a violation of Federal criminal law, the IG is required by the IG Act to refer the matter to a prosecutor,” a DOJ spokesperson told CNSNews.com.

“The IG presents their cases directly to the prosecuting offices, and the prosecutors make the decisions about whether to accept or decline cases for prosecution,” said the spokesperson. “Those decisions are made looking at the law and the facts.”

“The process by which a particular prosecuting office is chosen varies, and is primarily determined by the location where the alleged offense occurred, i.e., the proper venue for a prosecution,” said the spokesperson. “There are instances in which the Department, through the ODAG [Office of the Deputy Attorney General], determines to what USAO [U.S. Attorney Office] we present our case, i.e., when a particular office may have a conflict and needs to be recused from handling the case.”

Neither the Department of Justice nor the Office of the Inspector General would discuss the specifics of the case cited in the investigative summary.


Please support CNSNews today! [a 501(c)(3) non-profit production of the Media Research Center]

DONATE

Or, book travel through MRC’s Travel Discounts Program! MRC receives a rebate for each booking when you use our special codes.

BOOK NOW