Fraud, Embezzlement, Bad Checks Legal rights

[nuitnoel]

I was interviewed by two agents from Homeland Security, one of whom filed charges against me. DHS did not file the charges, the agent filed them.

Prior to the interview, I requested to have my daughter and good friend present. We met at the county library. I was told that I could only have one person. I asked him for the regulation that stipulates I could only have one person and he never responded to me.

I then decided that it would be better to digitally record the interview. It was a formal investigation. I was able to record about 60 seconds before the agent told me that I did not have his permission to record the interview and he said it was against the law. Maryland does have a law that you need permission from both parties.

It left some thoughts:

Why would a recording be inappropriate since there were two agents and just me?
What would have made the agent deny this?
Why do you think he denied my recording the interview?
Do I have any recourse now?

Now they can say anything they want because it's the two of them against my word and I told them that this was the reason I wanted to record the interview.

I would not write a statement.

 

[jharris352]

You shouldn't have made a statement at all.

 

[army judge]

Never, ever under any circumstances speak to any agent if the law, if you are the target of an investigation.
This is especially applicable in the federal system.
Just ask Martha Stewart.

What did they want to interview about?
Are their charges pending against you?
Why didn't you ask them to meet you at your lawyer's office?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nuitnoel]

As I understand, since I'm a federal employee, I thought I had to meet with them. No $$, no lawyer. I am accused of embezzling funds from a private corporation. The corporation had no relationship with the federal government. I'm assuming you are government and may understand what I'm going to explain. Federal agencies, coerce employees to form corporations and these corporations enter into contracts with another private corporation who then operates the agency child care centers. The relieves the agency of the burden. However, the agency provides no legal assistance to those employees. They are on their own. In March 2003, the agency hired me and illegally appointed me to Chair this corporation. The was the first inappropriate action. The agency had no authority to interfere with a private corporation that they were not giving any federal funds to. Second, it was a conflict of interest. I was compelled to sign the contract with the vendor as part of my federal job. I was not a contracting officer. I was a child care specialist. For nearly four years I fought with the agency over this. Finally, in 12/06 the board refused to sign any more contracts with the child care vendor. At that point, the agency terminated all relationships with the corporation. This is all documented. The agency expected to manipulate the corporation and when the board members discovered that the agency would not back us with legal representation, they all pulled out. The corporation received small rebate checks from vendors who sold bath products, books, and candles. These were not donations. They were clearly labeled rebates by the vendor. There were no restrictions. In February 2007, the board voted to allow me to use $1500 for an attorney to give us some guidance. I also submitted a bill for personal expenses over the 4 yr period - phone, travel and mileage, parking, etc.

My former supervisor would intercept the mail for this corporation that was delivered to the child care center. He would send someone over to the center to pick up the corporation mail that was supposed to come to me. He opened the mail and kept it. In December 2007, he gave the mail to the agency OIG who then told him, the funds were not government funds. Two years later, after I left the agency, he went to Homeland Security. He accused me of embezzling funds because he had no idea of what the board allowed. All he saw were the checks written to me.

So now, DHS decides to investigate. They first say the agency ran the board (untrue), then they say the "crime" took place on government property (untrue), then they say the funds were for tuition assistance (untrue), and then they referred to individuals claiming they were on the board (untrue) - this individual resigned in 2004.

So, when they wanted to meet with me, I had no idea what it was about. I knew that I had to comply. I did not lie about anything. I knew about Martha Stewart. I knew that I had the documentation.

DHS must have realized that they could not file charges so they filed a complaint with the local county PD. So it's the state vs me.

My questions are still the same:
Why would a recording be inappropriate since there were two agents and just me?
What would have made the agent deny this?
Why do you think he denied my recording the interview?
Do I have any recourse now?

I did not write a statement. I knew better. I just want to know if any rights were violated when I wanted to record the interview.

I know how these guys lie. I wasn't about to let them lie about me but when he refused to allow me to record the session, I was suspect.

I can't go back to the interview. Telling me what I should and should not have done doesn't answer the questions. I'm depending on those of you who are experienced.
Thanks

 

[nuitnoel]

PS If you would like to see a more detailed 11 page description of the situation, I would be happy to mail it to you.

 

[jacksgal]

You need to take what you have and talk to an Attorney. Many offer free consultations. You can at least get info on what you shouyld do next. In fact I suggest you get as many free consultations from as many Lawyers as you can.