[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[FWD: Re: ARTICLE IN THE NEWS]



Haytham,

Below is what Janet sent and my response.  I asked her about the request to see what she was accused of, believing that it was a Brady violation but she's speaking of asking 'before' she was fired and she was denied access to the complaints filed.  She also mentioned something that sparked my "OPM incompetency" belief - When the OPM "Recovery Agents" were conducting their investigation, she brought up that one was interviewing her and the other was taking notes.  She then said that OPM Agents are trained to take their own notes.  I pointed out to her that this goes back to OPM splitting the sheets with regulations.  If a federal agent is conducting an 'interview' they are trained that two agents are in the room - one taking notes and the other conducting the interview with very little note taking.  So, once again, was that interview investigating criminal activity or investigating a human resources/personnel labor issue?

She also mentioned that during her discovery, OPM told her that the OPM Recovery Agents' notes are destroyed after ninety days.  So once again, are the OPM Recovery Agents conducting criminal investigations or human resources inquiries and using them to take people to criminal court?

Carolyn Martin                                        
Military Criminal Defense &
Federal Contract Investigator
Ph: 760-445-0711  /  Fax: 760-730-3611
             

"A fox should not be on the jury at a goose's trial."  ~~Thomas Fuller
  
Confidential: This communication contains confidential and/or privileged information and is intended only for the person or entity named. Anyone other than the intended recipient, or the named recipient's employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the named recipient, is prohibited from reading, copying, distributing, disseminating, or otherwise using the information contained in this communication.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: ARTICLE IN THE NEWS
From: cem1775@aol.com
Date: Thu, October 06, 2011 6:38 pm
To: janet@maxambit.com
Cc: cmartin@afcia.us

Janet,

It's my understanding that Haytham did a wonderful radio interview, today.  He hasn't heard all the hoop-la about OPM's denying due process.  But, I forwarding this to him so he can learn the facts without being fire hosed. 

Thanks, again for all you input.

Carol



-----Original Message-----
From: janet <janet@maxambit.com>
To: cem1775 <cem1775@aol.com>
Sent: Wed, Oct 5, 2011 9:39 pm
Subject: Re: ARTICLE IN THE NEWS

Carol,
 
Does Hatham think it's crazy - or more importantly does he think it's illegal - that OPM does not permit investigators/agents to see the complaints/allegations made against them before they initiate these "integrity investigations?" OPM doesn't permit it even during the investigation. 
 
I felt so damn stupid and mad once I made the FOI request and received all the documents and complaints. I realized that had I had access to this information PRIOR to being investigated, I could have defended myself and might not have been terminated.
 
In Ryan Bernardi's and Ronald Pullen's (agent) depositions they claim that they don't know if it is legal or not to allow an Investigator to see complaints made about them by third parties and that only during criminal investigations is the accused permitted to see a complaint. Scary.
 
Janet 
 
 

On October 5, 2011 at 3:40 PM cem1775@aol.com wrote:

Janet,

Attached is one of the news stories about Ramon's indictment.  Note that his attorney, Hatham Faraj stated that OPM practices are going to be on trial.  This is getting gooooood.

Carol