U.S. Office of Government Ethics
1201 New York Avenue, NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20005-3917        
        
        
        
                                             August 22, 2007
                                             DO-07-030




MEMORANDUM 

TO:		Designated Agency Ethics Officials and Inspectors 
		General

FROM:		Robert I. Cusick
		Director

SUBJECT:	2006 Conflict of Interest Prosecution Survey


        This Office has completed its annual survey of prosecutions 
involving the conflict of interest criminal statutes 
(18 U.S.C. &#167;&#167; 202-209) for the period January 1, 2006, through 
December 31, 2006. Information on twelve new prosecutions by 
U.S. Attorneys' offices and the Public Integrity Section of the 
Department of Justice's Criminal Division was provided to us 
with the assistance of the Executive Office for United States 
Attorneys in the Department of Justice. Summaries of the 
prosecutions reported to this Office for past years can be found 
on our web site at www.usoge.gov under "Laws and Regulations."

______________________________________________________________________

2006 CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROSECUTION SURVEY


1.  United States v. David H. Safavian

From 2002 to the beginning of 2004 David H. Safavian served as 
the Chief of Staff for the Administrator of the General Services 
Administration (GSA).  In 2002 lobbyist Jack Abramoff invited 
Safavian and several other Government officials and lobbyists on 
a golf trip to St. Andrews golf course in Scotland.  Abramoff 
was to provide a private jet for transportation.  In June 2002, 
Safavian contacted his ethics official and asked for an opinion 
about whether he could participate in the trip.

When he asked for the opinion, he informed the ethics official 
that Abramoff did not have any business with GSA at the time of 
the invitation and that he did all of his work on Capitol Hill.  
But Safavian did not tell the ethics official that, in fact, 
Abramoff was seeking to lease or purchase GSA-controlled 
property and that he (Safavian) was assisting him with regard to 
that project.  Based on the information Safavian provided, the 
ethics official indicated that acceptance of the trip was 
permissible.

Safavian then accompanied Abramoff and the others on the trip.  
Several months later, after receiving an anonymous tip, the GSA 
Office of the Inspector General (GSA-OIG) opened an 
investigation into the trip.  Almost a year after that 
investigation was opened, the Washington Post published the 
first of a series of articles about Abramoffs dealings with 
several Indian tribes.  The articles prompted the Senate 
Committee on Indian Affairs to conduct an investigation into the 
trip.  Safavian was questioned about his involvement in the trip 
during both investigations.  He responded to the questions 
verbally and by providing documents.  To both the GSA-OIG 
investigator and the committee he made statements similar to 
those he had made to the ethics official.

In June 2006 a jury found him guilty of one count of obstruction 
of justice under 18 U.S.C. &#167; 1505, interfering with the 
investigation by the GSA-OIG.  They also found him guilty of 
three counts of making false statements or committing acts of 
concealment under 18 U.S.C. &#167; 1001(a) with regard to his 
communications to the ethics official, to the GSA-OIG agent, and 
to the Senate committee:  (1) guilty of both concealing his 
assistance to Abramoff in GSA-related activities and of falsely 
stating to the GSA ethics official that Abramoff did all of his 
work on Capitol Hill when Safavian knew that prior to the trip 
Abramoff was seeking to lease or purchase GSA-controlled 
property; (2) guilty of concealing from the GSA-OIG agent his 
assistance to Abramoff in GSA-related activities; and (3) guilty 
of falsely stating in a letter to the Senate committee that 
Abramoff did not have any business with GSA at the time he 
invited Safavian on the trip when Safavian knew that Abramoff 
was seeking to lease or purchase GSA-controlled property.

In October 2006, he was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the 
Department of Justice handled the prosecution.


2.  United States v. Dr. Pearson Trey Sunderland III

As the Chief of the Geriatric Psychiatric Branch of the National 
Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Dr. Trey Sunderland 
supervised NIMHs geriatric research on Alzheimers disease, 
including the creation and management of collaborations with 
outside partners, such as other governmental agencies, 
educational institutions, and businesses.

As a senior employee at the agency, Sunderland was required to 
disclose annually on his confidential financial disclosure 
report (OGE Form 450) the income he earned from outside 
employment arrangements (including consulting work) and travel 
expenses over $260.  In addition, before he engaged in outside 
employment, he was required to file a form with his agency 
ethics official disclosing the name of the outside entity, the 
nature of the proposed employment, and the compensation to be 
paid.

In 1997 representatives of Pfizer, Inc. approached Sunderland 
about the possibility of the NIMH joining with its researchers 
on a project to uncover new Alzheimers biomarkers in the blood 
or cerebral spinal fluid of Alzheimers patients.  Sunderland 
agreed to the collaboration between NIMH and Pfizer.  Between 
1998 and 2003, Sunderland and his staff worked in their official 
capacities on this project with Pfizer.  In 1998, Sunderland 
also initiated negotiations with Pfizer to work as a consultant 
on the same project.  During the next five years he worked as a 
consultant for Pfizer on this project.  He received retainer 
fees of $125,000, additional fees totaling $35,000 for attending 
14 one-day meetings at Pfizer, and related travel expenses.

Also in 1998 Sunderland asked Pfizer to participate in another 
research project at NIMH to compare levels of known biomarkers 
present in the cerebrospinal fluid of Alzheimers patients.  
Pfizer accepted.  Between 1998 and 2003 Sunderland, as an 
employee of NIMH, worked with Pfizer on this project.  But in 
July 1998, Sunderland negotiated with Pfizer to be paid as a 
consultant for his work on this same project.  Over the next 
five years he served as a consultant to Pfizer on the project 
and was paid $125,000 in retainer fees.

Sunderland did not disclose to his supervisors at the NIMH the 
existence of the Pfizer consultancy for the two research 
projects, or the fees and expenses paid to him.  He also failed 
to receive authorization from the ethics officials to engage in 
the consultancy.

In December 2006 Sunderland pleaded guilty to a violation of 
18 U.S.C. &#167; 208(a).  Later that month he was sentenced to two 
years probation.  He was also ordered to forfeit $300,000 and 
to perform 400 hours of community service.

The District of Maryland handled the prosecution.


3.  United States v. Ryan H. Rainey

Ryan H. Rainey served as a senior trial attorney in DOJs Civil 
Rights Division, Special Litigation Section, from January 2002 
through April 1, 2005.  Prior to joining the Civil Rights 
Division, he served as an Assistant United States Attorney in 
the District of Columbia for seven years.  During his time in 
the Civil Rights Division, his responsibilities included 
investigating alleged civil rights abuses of persons confined in 
certain institutions owned or operated by, or on behalf of, 
state and local governments.

On April 3, 2003, the DOJ Civil Rights Division opened an 
investigation into alleged civil rights abuses at a juvenile 
correctional facility located in Stockton, California.  Rainey 
served as the lead counsel in the Departments investigation.  
But from February 2004 to June 2004, while serving as lead 
counsel for the Department in the investigation, Rainey was 
negotiating employment with the state of California to serve as 
a special master appointed to monitor and oversee the states 
reform of its juvenile facilities.  One of those facilities was 
the one that was the subject of the on-going DOJ investigation.  
Rainey did not disclose the employment negotiations to his 
supervisors.  When the supervisors learned of the negotiations 
in June 2004, they removed him from the investigation into the 
Stockton facility.

In June 2006 Rainey pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 208(a), participating personally and substantially in a 
Government investigation of an entity while negotiating for 
employment with that entity.  In his guilty plea, he also 
admitted that he attempted to obstruct the Governments 
investigation into his conduct by lying to investigators and 
then contacting a witness in an effort to conceal his lie.  In 
September 2006 he was sentenced to one year of probation and 
ordered to pay a $3,000 fine.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the 
Department of Justice handled the prosecution.


3.  United States v. Natalie Coker and United States v. Dennis 
Michael Barrett

Natalie Coker was the Associate Director of the Department of 
Veterans Affairs (VA) Consolidated Mail Outpatient Pharmacy 
(CMOP) in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.  Her supervisor, 
Joseph Haymond, was the director of CMOP.  Dennis Michael 
Barrett was the owner/operator of a company that earned 
commissions from private companies by placing the companies into 
contracts with the VA.

In the summer of 2002, Coker and Haymond wanted Barrett to find 
a company that could repackage or prepackage pharmaceuticals for 
the CMOP.  Barrett mentioned this to his business partner, 
Kevin Bowling.  Bowling responded that his father-in-law, 
Bob Allen, might be interested.  Barrett met with Bowling and 
Allen, who did express an interest.  Barrett set up and attended 
a meeting with Bowling, Allen, Coker, and Haymond.  Coker 
explained the type of service she was looking for and provided 
logistical information.  At the meeting it was determined that 
Coker would gather applicable quantity and pricing information, 
and that Coker and Haymond would give the contract to Allen.

Allen then formed a company called PrePak Systems, Incorporated, 
which he owned along with Bowling and two others.  Coker 
personally helped PrePak during the initial stages of its 
organization by finding equipment, finding suppliers of bottles, 
and dealing with regulatory issues.  With Haymond, Coker also 
went to PrePaks business location, checking out its size and 
location, looking at equipment, and advising PrePak as to 
Government requirements.

In addition, Coker helped Allen obtain a letter from the CMOP to 
show to lenders that expressed the CMOPs interest in doing 
business with PrePak.  She also helped PrePak understand issues 
related to quantity and pricing of prepackaged drugs.

Coker subsequently awarded the contract to PrePak without 
competitive bidding.  Barrett, who received a commission on what 
the CMOP was paying PrePak, estimated that CMOP paid PrePak 
hundreds of thousands of dollars for this work.

During this time, Coker was negotiating for employment with 
PrePak.  Allen asked Barrett whether Coker or Haymond would be 
interested in a position with PrePak as a full-time pharmacist.  
Barrett responded that Coker might be interested.  Allen talked 
with Coker, who was receptive to Allens offer.  She negotiated 
with Allen regarding prospective employment with PrePak through 
a series of e-mails with Allen.  In these e-mails, they 
discussed possible terms of employment, including compensation, 
relocation to Cookeville, Tennessee, and a work schedule.  
Ultimately, she declined the offer of employment.   Coker had 
received periodic ethics training, which included the 
restrictions on negotiating for employment.

In March 2006 Coker pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 208(a), participating personally and substantially in a 
particular matter involving PrePak while negotiating for 
employment with the company.  On October 16, 2006, she was 
sentenced to 46 months in prison and a $10,000 fine.  Barrett 
also pleaded guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. &#167; 208(a) and was 
sentenced on October 19, 2006 to two years probation and a 
$5,000 fine.

The Middle District of Tennessee handled the prosecution.


5.  United States v. Bobby L. Jolley

Bobby L. Jolley, the director of the War Fighting Center at 
I Corps at Fort Lewis, Washington, was required to file annually 
a confidential financial disclosure report (OGE Form 450).  In 
that report he was required to list his assets and income, among 
other financial information.  Jolley owned a ranch called 
Woodland Farm.  He failed to disclose his ownership of the ranch 
on the OGE Form 450.

Jolley pleaded guilty to one count of violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 1018, making and delivering a false certificate or writing.  
He was sentenced to six months unsupervised probation and a 
$2,500 fine.

The Western District of Washington handled the prosecution.


6.  United States v. Anthony Mingo

From mid 2003 until late 2004, Anthony J. Mingo was a paid 
consultant to Management Control Systems (MCS), a small 
Government contractor owned by Nadine Lucas.  In the summer of 
2003, Mingo helped prepare the paperwork necessary for MCS to 
obtain a GSA contract to supply IT services and parts to the 
Department of Public Works at the Navy base at Dahlgren, 
Virginia.  In connection with the GSA contract, Mingo and Lucas 
received significant help from a Navy civilian employee, 
Michael Causer, the Supervisor of Public Works at the Dahlgren 
facility.  Shortly after Lucas company was awarded the GSA 
contract, Lucas told Mingo that she wanted to reward Causer for 
his assistance in obtaining the contract.  Causer had previously 
told Lucas that he wanted to buy a tractor for his five-acre 
residence.  Mingo discussed the matter with Causer and in 
November 2003 arranged for the purchase of a $22,000 Kioti 
tractor and delivered it to Causers residence.  Mingo also 
helped facilitate bid rigging that Causer had engineered in 
order to direct additional Dahlgren business to Lucas company.

In December 2006 Mingo pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 209, illegally supplementing the salary of a Federal official 
by purchasing a new tractor for him.  He was sentenced to 
two years supervised probation, a $12,000 fine, and 150 hours of 
community service.  Causer had pleaded guilty to his role in the 
bid rigging scheme in November 2006.  He was sentenced to 
15 months in prison and ordered to pay $252,000 in restitution 
to the United States.  In February 2007 Lucas pleaded guilty to 
conspiracy to pay illegal gratuities to a Federal official 
(Causer).  She was sentenced to four months in prison and an 
additional four months of home detention.  She was also ordered 
to pay $20,000 in restitution.

The Eastern District of Virginia handled the prosecution.

7.  United States v. Cynthia Jameson

Cynthia Jameson, an employee of the General Services 
Administration (GSA), was the Director of the Kentucky Property 
Management Center at the GSA office in Louisville, Kentucky.  In 
this position, she had authority over a number of 
GSA contractors, including one contractor who employed Jamesons 
live-in companion.  Jameson also had two dependent children who 
were employed by the same GSA contractor on an intermittent 
basis.  During the time that her live-in companion and children 
worked for the contractor, Jameson participated personally and 
substantially through the decision, approval, and recommendation 
of Government contracts to that contractor, actions that 
financially benefited her.

In August 2006 Jameson pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 208(a) by participating in the approval or recommendation of a 
Government contract in which she had a financial interest.  She 
was sentenced to 24 months probation, a $1,000 fine, and a 
$25 special penalty assessment.

The Western District of Kentucky handled the prosecution.


8.  United States v. Hardrick Crawford, Jr.

While serving as the Special Agent in Charge of the FBIs 
El Paso Division, Hardrick Crawford, Jr. accepted substantial 
gifts from a Mexican racetrack owner and sometime FBI informant.  
In addition, Crawford did not disclose the gifts on his public 
financial disclosure report (SF 278).

In August 2006 a Federal jury found Crawford guilty of violating 
18 U.S.C. &#167; 1001, making false statements on his public 
financial disclosure report for calendar year 2002 and 
concealing material facts from the FBI regarding his association 
with the racetrack owner.  In January 2007 Crawford was 
sentenced to six months in prison, a $10,000 fine, and 
three years supervised release during which time he must 
complete 200 hours of community service.
 
The Western District of Texas handled the prosecution.


9.  United States v. Robert W. Ney

From January 1995 to January 2007 Robert W. Ney served as an 
elected member of the U.S. House of Representatives for the 
18th Congressional District in Ohio.  In September 2006, the 
Department of Justice charged Ney with conspiring with several 
individuals (Jack Abramoff, Neil Volz, Tony Rudy, 
Michael P.S. Scanlon, an unnamed Congressional staffer, and an 
unnamed foreign businessman) to use mail and interstate wire 
communications to deprive the public of the honest services of 
Ney and his staff, to commit false statements, and to aid and 
abet a violation by former Congressional staff member Volz of 
the one-year lobbying ban.  The Department also charged him with 
making false statements on Government forms by concealing and 
misrepresenting his receipt of items of value from his co-
conspirators.

The facts supporting these charges are as follows.  From 
2000 through April 2004 Ney and members of his staff solicited 
and accepted items of value from the foreign businessman, 
Abramoff, Scanlon, Volz, Rudy, and other lobbyists working for 
Abramoff with the intent to be influenced and induced to take a 
series of official actions.  The items that Ney solicited and 
accepted from Abramoff and other lobbyists included the 
following:  1) all-expense-paid trips and reduced-price trips to 
Scotland to play golf, to New Orleans to gamble and vacation, 
and to Lake George, New York to vacation; 2) meals and drinks at 
Washington, D.C. restaurants; and 3) tickets to use Abramoffs 
box suites to attend sporting events.  In exchange, Ney 
supported or opposed legislation at Abramoffs request.

Ney also accepted an all-expense-paid trip to London to meet 
with the foreign businessman to discuss strategies to alter 
U.S. laws prohibiting the businessman from selling airplanes and 
parts in a foreign country.  During the trip, the foreign 
businessman gave Ney and his staff thousands of dollars in 
gambling chips to use at casinos.  Ney won additional money 
while gambling.  He and his staff brought the money into the 
U.S., but he failed to report to Customs Service officials the 
total amount that he brought in.

Finally, Ney allowed and encouraged Volz, his former Chief of 
Staff, to lobby Ney and his staff on various issues from 
February 2002 through February 2003.  Ney knew that such 
activity was in violation of the one-year lobbying ban.  Volz 
had left Government service in February 2002.

The second charge includes Neys false statements on Government 
forms with regard to the trips paid for by his co-conspirators.  
On his travel disclosure form, which he filed with the 
U.S. House of Representatives, Ney substantially under-reported 
the expenses paid by Abramoff and his clients for the golf trip 
to Scotland, and he mischaracterized the purpose of the trip.  
In connection with the trip to London, he underreported on his 
travel disclosure form the expenses that had been paid by 
private sources.

The second charge also encompasses false statements he made on 
two of his annual financial disclosure statements.  On his 2002 
statement he mischaracterized the purpose of the Scotland trip 
and failed to disclose as gifts the golf expenses as well as the 
tickets, meals, and entertainment provided by Abramoff and the 
other lobbyists working with Abramoff.  On his 2003 statement he 
failed to disclose trips, tickets, meals, and entertainment 
provided by Abramoff and the other lobbyists working with 
Abramoff, including gifts of free travel, accommodations, and 
other expenses associated with trips that Ney took to 
Lake George, New York and New Orleans, Louisiana.  He 
understated his receipt of gifts and omitted as the source of 
those gifts the foreign businessman by reporting that he had won 
$34,000 playing a game of chance at a casino.  He also 
intentionally failed to include thousands of additional dollars 
he received.

Ney pleaded guilty in October 2006 to one count of a violation 
of 18 U.S.C. &#167; 371, conspiracy to commit multiple offenses 
including honest services mail and wire fraud (18 U.S.C. &#167;&#167; 1341, 
1343, and 1346), making false statements (18 U.S.C. &#167; 1001), and 
violations of his former chief of staffs one-year lobbying ban 
(18 U.S.C. &#167; 207(e)).  He also pleaded guilty to one count of 
making false statements to the U.S. House of Representatives in 
violation of 18 U.S.C. &#167; 1001(a)(2).  In January 2007 he was 
sentenced to 30 months in prison to be followed by two years 
supervised release.  He was also fined $6,000, ordered to pay a 
special assessment of $200, and ordered to perform 600 hours of 
community service for each year of supervised release.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the 
Department of Justice handled the prosecution.


10.  United States v. Roger G. Stillwell

Roger G. Stillwell, an employee of the Department of the 
Interior, was the desk officer for the Northern Mariana Islands 
from 2001 to August 11, 2006.  In the 1990s, he had been a 
Washington-based consultant for the territory.  It was during 
this time that he met Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist.  
Abramoff was helping the islands resist congressional efforts to 
establish minimum wage and immigration laws in the territory.  
The governor of the territory at that time asked Stillwell to 
teach Abramoff the history of the islands in preparation for the 
lobbying campaign.

During this time Stillwell and Abramoff developed a personal 
friendship.  It was also during this time that Abramoff began 
giving Stillwell and his family sporting and concert tickets.  
Stillwell offered to pay for the items, but Abramoff would tell 
Stillwell that the tickets were for unused seats and he wanted 
to give them to a friend.

When Stillwell became an employee of the Department of the 
Interior, the gift-giving did not stop.  In 2003 he accepted 
from Abramoff tickets to a Washington Redskins game and to a 
Simon and Garfunkel concert.  The total value of these tickets 
was $482.  He falsely certified on his confidential financial 
disclosure report that he had not received gifts totaling more 
than $285.

Stillwell was charged with one count of falsely certifying on 
his financial disclosure report that he had not received any 
reportable gifts, a violation of 18 U.S.C. &#167; 1018.  In 
August 2006 Stillwell pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 1018.  In January 2007 he was sentenced by the District Court 
of the District of Columbia to two years probation and fined 
$1,000.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the 
Department of Justice handled the prosecution.


11.  United States v. Randall Duke Cunningham

Randall Duke Cunningham was the U.S. Representative from the 
50th Congressional District in California from 1991 to 2005.  
During his service as a U.S. Representative, Cunningham accepted 
numerous bribes from several co-conspirators in exchange for 
taking official action to influence the appropriation of funds 
and the execution of Government contracts in ways that benefited 
two of the co-conspirators, who were majority owners of defense 
contracting companies.  Specifically, he sold his home in 
Del Mar, California at an artificially inflated price to a 
defense contractor whom he later helped obtain Government 
contracts.  Another defense contractor paid off the mortgage on 
Cunninghams new home in Rancho Santo Fe.  A third co-
conspirator made the down payment on Cunninghams condominium in 
Arlington, Virginia.  Defense contractors also purchased a yacht 
and a Rolls Royce for Cunningham, paid for a graduation party 
for his daughter, and paid for jewelry, home furnishings, and 
travel and hotel expenses.  Cunningham did not disclose these 
benefits on his annual financial disclosure reports filed with 
the U.S. House of Representatives.

In November 2005 Cunningham pleaded guilty to committing tax 
evasion and to conspiring to commit bribery, honest services 
fraud, and tax evasion.  In March 2006 he was sentenced to 
100 months in prison to be followed by three years supervised 
release.  He was also ordered to pay $1,804,031.50 in 
restitution for back taxes, penalties and interest owed to the 
Government and to forfeit an additional $1,851,508 in U.S. 
currency based upon the cash payments he received during the 
conspiracy.

The Southern District of California handled the prosecution.


12.  United States v. Karla R. Kronstein, United States v. 
Michael G. Kronstein, and United States v. Kenneth N. 
Harvey

Kenneth N. Harvey was the chief of the Acquisition Logistics and 
Field Support Branch within the U.S. Army Intelligence and 
Security Command (INSCOM) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.  He was 
responsible for recommending the award, modification, and 
payment of maintenance and logistics contracts in support of 
INSCOM missions throughout the world.  Michael G. Kronstein was 
the owner and chief executive officer of Program Contract 
Services, Inc. (PCS).  In November 1998, Harvey recommended that 
INSCOM award a sole-source maintenance and logistics contract to 
PCS.  Following the contract award, Harvey recommended various 
modifications to the contract, many of which increased the total 
contract payout to Mr. Kronsteins company.  Harvey also 
reviewed and approved payments to PCS.

In exchange for these acts, Mr. Kronstein caused payments 
totaling more than $40,000 to be made to Harveys spouse and 
third parties for Harveys benefit.  On four occasions, 
Mr. Kronstein directed his wife Karla to write the checks for 
these payments.

Mr. Kronstein also offered Harvey employment with PCS at the 
same time Harvey oversaw a final modification to the contract.  
Harvey concealed the payments and the offer of employment from 
his superiors at INSCOM.

In October 2006 Karla Kronstein pleaded guilty to violating 
18 U.S.C. &#167; 209, illegally supplementing the salary of a 
Government employee.  She was sentenced to three years probation 
and ordered to pay a $25 special assessment.  Pursuant to the 
plea agreement, Karla waived her testimonial spousal privilege 
and testified at trial against her husband and Harvey.

In December 2006 a Federal jury convicted Michael Kronstein and 
Harvey of two counts each of honest services wire fraud and one 
count each of bribery.  In March 2007 Michael Kronstein was 
sentenced to 70 months in prison, and Harvey was sentenced to 
72 months in prison.  Both defendants were also sentenced to 
three years of supervised release and jointly ordered to pay 
more than $383,000 in restitution.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the 
Department of Justice handled the prosecution.


13.  United States v. Lester M. Crawford

Over a period of years, Lester M. Crawford held several senior 
positions within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA):  Deputy 
Commissioner between February 2002 and March 2004, Acting 
Commissioner between March 2004 and July 2005, and finally 
Commissioner between July 2005 and September 2005, when he 
resigned.  As a senior FDA employee, he was required to file 
annual public financial disclosure reports (SF 278).  In 
February 2005 when he was selected for the post of Commissioner, 
he was required to file with the Senate committee hearing his 
nomination a nominee SF 278 and a Statement for Completion by 
Presidential Nominees.  On the SF 278, he was required to list 
assets having a value that exceeded $1,000 and that either he or 
his wife held during the applicable reporting period.  He was 
also required to disclose any assets that produced more than 
$200 in income during the reporting period.  Any FDA employee 
who was required to file an SF 278 could not hold a financial 
interest, such as stock or stock options, in a significantly 
regulated industry.  Federal regulations define such industries 
as organizations for which the sales of products regulated by 
the FDA constitute ten percent of more of annual gross sales in 
the organizations previous year.

During the relevant time periods, Crawford and/or his wife owned 
stock or stock options in Pepsico, Sysco, Kimberly-Clark, and 
Embrex, all of which were significantly regulated organizations.  
On the SF 278 and in an e-mail to an agency ethics official, 
Crawford failed to disclose his and his wifes ownership of this 
stock.  In July 2004, he filed an SF 278 in which he did list 
the Sysco and Kimberly-Clark stock.  But when an agency ethics 
official later inquired about his ownership of the stock, 
Crawford responded in an e-mail that he had sold the stock.  In 
fact, he had not sold the stock.  In February 2005, he did not 
disclose on his nominee SF 278 his exercise of Embrex stock 
options or the ownership of Sysco or Kimberly-Clark stock.  He 
also did not disclose his exercise of the Embrex options on his 
February 2005 Statement to the Senate Committee.  The omissions 
on the SF 278s and in the e-mail were the basis of a false 
writings charge.

A conflict of interest charge arose out of his and his wifes 
ownership of Sysco and Pepsico stock.  He was the Chairman of 
the FDAs Obesity Working Group (OWG).  In 2004 he and the OWGs 
Vice Chairman submitted a report on obesity to the FDA 
Commissioner at the time.  The report contained many 
recommendations, including encouraging manufacturers to re-label 
serving sizes on products such as sodas.  Pepsico is a 
manufacturer of sodas and snack food, and Sysco is a 
manufacturer of food products.  By participating in the working 
group and its recommendations, he participated personally and 
substantially in a particular matter in which he and his wife 
had a financial interest.

In October 2006 Crawford pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 208, participating in a particular matter in which he and his 
wife had a financial interest, and 18 U.S.C. &#167; 1018, making 
false writings by failing to disclose his and his wifes 
ownership of certain stock and stock options on his public 
financial disclosure form and in an e-mail.  In February 2007 he 
was sentenced to three years of supervised probation.  He was 


also ordered to pay a fine of $90,000, perform 50 hours of 
community service, and pay the costs of his probation.

The District of Columbia handled the prosecution.


14.  United States v. Bonnie Murphy

Bonnie Murphy, a Defense Department employee, deployed to Iraq 
in December 2003 as part of a Defense Reutilization and 
Marketing Service (DRMS) team.  She and other DRMS employees 
were responsible for managing and disposing of surplus DoD 
property, including hazardous waste.  From July through December 
2004, she accepted several pieces of gold jewelry worth 
approximately $9,000 from the owners and employees of an Iraqi 
contracting company.

Between July and October 2004, this company received three 
service contracts from the U.S. Army.  Before each contract 
award, Murphy wrote a statement of work requesting that the U.S. 
Army hire a contractor to perform the disposal of hazardous 
waste, the removal of contaminated soil, and the removal and 
storage of used lithium batteries.  She verbally recommended 
that the Iraqi company be hired for each contract and she wrote 
a sole source justification letter recommending that it receive 
the lithium battery contract without undergoing a competitive 
bidding process.  She also oversaw each contract - authorizing 
the company to do work, monitoring its performance, and 
certifying its invoices.

In November 2006 Murphy pleaded guilty to a violation of 
18 U.S.C. &#167; 209, accepting illegal compensation from the Iraqi 
contractor for helping it obtain U.S. Army contracts.  In 
March 2007 she was sentenced to one year probation and a 
$1,500 fine.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the 
Department of Justice handled the prosecution.


15.  United States v. Jane G. Selby

Jane G. Selby was a manager at the Bonneville Power 
Administration (BPA).  Knowmadic was a company that sold 
software and software-related services to BPA.  A Federal 
investigation revealed that while employed by the BPA, Selby 
solicited Knowmadic to hire her husband as a salesman and then 
used her influence at BPA to advocate for the expanded use of 
the contractors software products.  In addition, she 
participated in matters related to BPAs use of Knowmadic 
software as part of a scheme to defraud BPA.  Finally, the 
investigation revealed that she made false statements in 
connection with her dealings with Knowmadic, attempted to 
obstruct the investigation, and tampered with a witness.

In December 2006, a Federal jury convicted Selby of violations 
of 18 U.S.C. &#167;&#167; 208 (participating personally and substantially 
in a matter in which she had a financial interest), 1001 (making 
a false statement) and 1343 (wire fraud).  In May 2007 she was 
sentenced to five years probation on the condition, among 
others, that she reside in a Bureau of Prisons contract facility 
for four months.

The District of Oregon prosecuted the case.


16.  United States v. Michael J. Peters

Michael J. Peters worked as a Senior Analyst in the Office of 
the Administrator for NASA.  His job was to evaluate and 
recommend financial software so that NASAs senior leadership 
could access the various NASA centers budgets and expenditures 
from a central location.  Peters recommended that NASA purchase 
a software product from Open System Sciences (OSS).  At the same 
time, OSS was paying Peters, through an intermediary, $25,500 to 
develop and market the OSS software product.  In addition, 
Peters intentionally omitted information about OSSs payments to 
him and disguised the payment on his public financial disclosure 
report (SF 278).  He was also required to file a Questionnaire 
for National Security Position, which required him to list all 
employment activities, including part-time work.  He did not 
list OSS or the intermediary on this form.

In October 2006, a Federal grand jury indicted him on three 
counts:  (1) conspiracy to accept gratuities, a violation of 
18 U.S.C. &#167;&#167; 371 and 201(c)(1)(B); (2) making false statements, 
a violation of 18 U.S.C. &#167; 1001(a)(2); and (3) engaging in acts 
affecting a financial interest, a violation of 18 U.S.C. 
&#167; 208(a).  In November 2006 Peters pleaded guilty to the charges 
of making false statements and of engaging in acts affecting a 
financial interest.  In March 2007 he was sentenced to two years 


probation, a fine of $25,500, and 500 hours of community 
service.

The District of Columbia handled the prosecution.


17.  United States v. Michael Rzeplinski, United States v. 
Connie Davidson, and United States v. Kirsten Davidson

Michael Rzeplinski served as a programs director for the General 
Services Administration (GSA) and as a supervisory engineer for 
the U.S. Army.  Connie Davidson was a GSA employee who resided 
with Rzeplinski.  Kirsten Davidson is Connies daughter.  In 
February 2002, Rzeplinski caused a project to be awarded to 
Aquila Management to provide IT-related services at 
Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.  He asked Aquila Management to hire 
Kirsten to perform computer-related work under his direction.  
The company then hired her, but she did not perform any work.  
Between February 2002 and February 2005, Aquila Management 
billed the Army, and Rzeplinski approved, the payment of 
approximately $283,000 in claims for work that Kirsten did not 
perform.

Rzeplinski also recommended that a GSA IT-related services task 
order be awarded to PCC Technology Group, Inc.  He asked that 
company to hire Kirsten to perform computer-related work under 
his direction.  The company did hire her, but again she 
performed no work.  Between January 2003 and October 2005, 
PCC was paid approximately $555,710 on this contract and on a 
separate GSA contract as a subcontractor for work that Kirsten 
never performed.

Rzeplinski caused PCC to hire a company called RZED Engineering 
Services (ZED), a sole proprietorship he controlled, as a 
subcontractor.  From June 2002 until October 2005, PCC mailed 
monthly checks in the amounts of $4,000 to $4,500 to Rzeplinski.  
He received a total of $151,500, but ZED never performed any 
work as a subcontractor.

Rzeplinski failed to file Federal income tax returns for the 
years 2002, 2003, and 2004, even though he did have taxable 
income during those years.

Kirsten Davidson admitted to Federal officials that she knew 
Rzeplinski agreed to get her jobs with both Aquila and PCC, that 
she was on the payrolls of the two companies, and that she did 
not perform any work for any pay.  She received approximately 
$282,000 as a result of these arrangements.

Connie Davidson was appointed to be the assistant contracting 
officers representative on the task order awarded to PCC.  Her 
job duties included the responsibility to report to GSA any 
instances in which PCC made claims for payment for work that had 
not been performed.  She admitted to Federal officials that in 
her capacity as a GSA employee she was aware that Rzeplinski had 
recommended the award of the task order to PCC and that he 
intended to have PCC hire her daughter Kirsten to perform work 
on the contract.  Connie Davidson also knew that PCC was paying 
her daughter and that her daughter did not perform any work for 
PCC.

In August 2006 the three defendants pleaded guilty to charges in 
connection with these activities, and they were sentenced in 
January 2007.  Rzeplinski pleaded guilty to tax evasion and to 
conspiracy to defraud the United States by making false claims.  
He was sentenced to 46 months in prison and ordered to pay 
$862,710 in restitution.  Kirsten Davidson pleaded guilty to 
conspiracy to defraud the United States by making false claims.  
She was sentenced to 18 months in prison and ordered to pay 
$290,647 in restitution.  Connie Davidson pleaded guilty to 
aiding and abetting the submission of false claims.  She was 
sentenced to 12 months in prison and ordered to pay $395,710 in 
restitution.

The District of New Jersey handled the prosecution.


18.  United States v. Dr. William L. Smith, Sr.

From August 1997 to January 2004 Dr. William L. Smith, Sr. was 
employed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
(NASA) at Langley Research Center.  He held various positions, 
and in 1999 he began serving as Senior Scientist, Atmospheric 
Sciences Competency, and as Principal Investigator for major 
airborne and satellite experiment programs.  The latter position 
included responsibility for contracts awarded under the 
programs.

In 2001, while serving as Senior Scientist and Principal 
Investigator for the contracts between NASA and the University 
of Wisconsin, Dr. Smith allegedly engaged in negotiations with 
the University of Wisconsin for a Distinguished Professor 
position following his retirement from NASA, in violation of 
18 U.S.C. &#167; 208(a).

In June 2006 the United States and Dr. Smith entered into a 
civil settlement under which Dr. Smith agreed to pay the United 
States a $7,500 civil penalty and the United States agreed to 
release Dr. Smith from any civil claims it had against him under 
18 U.S.C. &#167; 208.  Under the terms of the agreement, Dr. Smith 
did not admit liability.

The Civil Division of the Department of Justice handled the 
case.


19.  United States v. John R. Van Rosendale

John R. Van Rosendale, an employee of the Department of Energy, 
was required by 5 U.S.C. app. &#167; 104 to file a termination public 
financial disclosure report when he left his Government 
position.  According to the United States, he knowingly and 
willingly failed to do so.

The United States and Mr. Van Rosendale entered into a civil 
settlement under which Mr. Van Rosendale agreed to pay a 
$2,500 civil penalty.

The Civil Division of the Department of Justice handled the 
case.