|
I write this with the following assumptions: 1.
The defendant investigator
has never been convicted of any integrity crime or crime of moral turpitude 2.
The investigator NEVER ghost wrote
or deliberately submitted false information. False information may be
submitted because of honest mistakes as a result of poor record keeping or
simple oversight 3.
The investigator can recollect
some details regarding the subject of the investigation, even in the absence of
notes or historic records. 4.
The Government’s allegations
are false. It seems fundamentally unfair to me that the Federal
government is prosecuting investigators based on allegations of falsifying
records several years after the maximum number of years that records of
investigation are required to be kept. Assuming that Government has it
wrong, how can a defendant defend him or herself when they are required by law
to submit ALL notes. And when the Government may destroy those notes 3
years after they have received them? In the case of Mr. Davila, he finds himself facing numerous
charges and a demand to plead guilty. It is clear that he can rebut much
of the Government’s allegations with travel and telephone records.
That defense could be perfected if he were allowed to use his notes which he no
longer has access to. As I consider how to defend these charges, I imagine standing
in front of the jury and explaining the dilemma of a clearly good person who is
fighting the power of the Government with his hands tied. A jury will not
like the unfair rules. A jury will believe a defendant with a history of
honorable service to the nation when he gets on the stand and tries to
recollect his moves, explains that he created notes that could assist him in recollecting
but can’t because the government took them and destroyed them. What this means is that a defendant will almost always have
to take the stand to explain. It also means and I firmly believe that a defendant
who lies to a jury does so at his or her own peril because jurors are pretty good
at detecting the truth. In such a trial I would want to use an experienced
investigator as an expert to discuss the restrictions imposed by OPM as
compared to other agencies. The expert would also talk to about how
investigations are conducted and why mistakes are sometimes made. I look forward to your thoughts and ideas Haytham Faraj, Esq. PUCKETT & FARAJ, PC _______________________ WASHINGTON DC METRO 1800 Diagonal Road Suite 210 Alexndria, VA 22314 DETROIT METRO 6200 Schaeffer Road Suite 202 Dearborn, MI 48126 703-706-9566 Phone 202.280.1039 Fax The information
contained in this electronic message is confidential, and is intended for the
use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution,
copying of disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
received this communication in error, please notify Puckett & Faraj, P.C.
at 888-970-0005 or via a return the e-mail to sender. You are
required to purge this E-mail immediately without reading or making any copy or
distribution. |