Allow me to post this clarification to my message posted yesterday.
When I wrote, "I was taught at FLETC that lying to a federal agent was a crime?" I did not intend to challenge Richardson for lying to Dobyns in his email. Field level employees at ATF have come to expect our supervisors to lie to our faces. I was referencing Richardsons lying to the OIG investigator. The OIG Agent was the "federal agent" I intended to highlight.
In the last 12 hours I have come to learn that Dobyns's confrontation of Richardson's cowardice is what led Richardson to later attempt to jam Dobyns up for misuse of a g-ride that was later proven to be a malicious act of reprisal and entirely baseless.
Great conduct for the guy who then was promoted to be the Chief of the PRB and now SAC (sarcasm).
Not an Attack - FACT
Started by
Guest_Lips_*
, Feb 24 2010 07:53 PM
4 replies to this topic
#2
Doc Holiday
-
- Moderators
-
- 568 posts
Regular
- LocationClassified.
Posted 24 February 2010 - 11:03 PM
Marvin, if you in fact wrote that statement EVER as a supervisor, look in the mirror. If you uttered those words, step down, retire or advise the bureau you have reconsidered Denver. Anything short of that and you are willingly and selfishly embarrasing the Bureau and yourself. If thats not clear enough, you showed cowardice for personal gain and you should be ashamed. Do as Vanessa did. Retire. You are not worthy of claiming the title of ATF Agent.
#3
Guest_Feel Me_*
Guest_Feel Me_*
-
- Guests
Posted 24 February 2010 - 10:20 PM
I was going to stand down but after reading Lips posting I simply have to add this.
A couple of days ago I posted on Marvin’s unwillingness to support his agents under the Discussion Heading, Future of the Bureau. “Jumper” posted on Marvin the same day under the Discussion Heading, It’s about ACCOUNTABLITY.
I now have a copy of the email Richardson sent to Dobyns after Dobyns exposed him for not showing any interest in the investigation of threats against Jay and his daughter. Richardson defended the allegation in writing to Jay with an outright and bold faced lie (compare Marvin’s answer here to the OIG investigative report). [I said I would post up the doc but I can't get it to upload. Write me if you want proof. I'll email it to you.]
“The threat was not brought to my attention or to the attention of anyone else in the Phoenix Field Division until I received a telephone call from the DC ASAC, a month after the fact.”
The OIG interviewed the DC ASAC on this. The DC ASAC says different. The OPSEC Chief says different. So do the several agents Richardson allegedly consulted very day of the threat. They all contradict SAC Richardson's explanation. I guess they are all lying and Marvin's the only one telling the truth? Not. Plus, how is it that Richardson responded to OPSEC (as confirmed by OIG) on the day of the threat by telling them it was his opinion that the threat source was not credible when he says he didn’t even know about the threat until a month later?
Marvin told so many lies on this case he couldn’t keep them all straight. When someone lies over and over it is no longer a mistake, it is a pattern. I was taught at FLETC that lying to a federal agent was a crime?
This is my favorite part of Marvin’s message.
His closing comment to Dobyns was,
“If you feel like you have been wronged then do what you need to do. File what you need to file and get on with your business. What kind of leadership to I exemplify? The kind that I can live with!
A couple of days ago I posted on Marvin’s unwillingness to support his agents under the Discussion Heading, Future of the Bureau. “Jumper” posted on Marvin the same day under the Discussion Heading, It’s about ACCOUNTABLITY.
I now have a copy of the email Richardson sent to Dobyns after Dobyns exposed him for not showing any interest in the investigation of threats against Jay and his daughter. Richardson defended the allegation in writing to Jay with an outright and bold faced lie (compare Marvin’s answer here to the OIG investigative report). [I said I would post up the doc but I can't get it to upload. Write me if you want proof. I'll email it to you.]
“The threat was not brought to my attention or to the attention of anyone else in the Phoenix Field Division until I received a telephone call from the DC ASAC, a month after the fact.”
The OIG interviewed the DC ASAC on this. The DC ASAC says different. The OPSEC Chief says different. So do the several agents Richardson allegedly consulted very day of the threat. They all contradict SAC Richardson's explanation. I guess they are all lying and Marvin's the only one telling the truth? Not. Plus, how is it that Richardson responded to OPSEC (as confirmed by OIG) on the day of the threat by telling them it was his opinion that the threat source was not credible when he says he didn’t even know about the threat until a month later?
Marvin told so many lies on this case he couldn’t keep them all straight. When someone lies over and over it is no longer a mistake, it is a pattern. I was taught at FLETC that lying to a federal agent was a crime?
This is my favorite part of Marvin’s message.
His closing comment to Dobyns was,
“If you feel like you have been wronged then do what you need to do. File what you need to file and get on with your business. What kind of leadership to I exemplify? The kind that I can live with!
#4
Doc Holiday
-
- Moderators
-
- 568 posts
Regular
- LocationClassified.
Posted 24 February 2010 - 09:23 PM
There were several of us who not only volunteered to be detailed down to Phoenix to follow-up the leads on threats to one of our own, BUT solicited Mr. Richardson thru channels to be either incarcerated with or transported with the subject who was "shopping" a contract to kill SA Dobyns. Mr. Richardson and the Phoenix field division respectfully declined. Bottom line is Mr. Richardson does not have the courage OR integrity to lead ATF into the future. But who cares, as usual he got his.
#5
Guest_Lips_*
Guest_Lips_*
-
- Guests
Posted 24 February 2010 - 07:53 PM
This is not intended as an attack on Marvin Richardson. I believe that he is probably a nice enough guy. This posting is provided to call out the SAC selection process and those senior ATF executives who make those decisions, in the case of Richardson, Ken Melson, Billy Hoover, Mark Chait and Bill McMahon. The facts presented are used to show how flawed that process is.
I cite two open source public documents. They are the OSC and OIG reports of investigation conducted regarding ATF’s mismanagement of the original set of threats against ATF Special Agent Jay Dobyns. I am posting some critical elements of those documents that address the mismanagement of Richardson and draw question to how he was selected to a vacant SAC post. The OIG report is 21 pages in length, the OSC report is 11 pages in length. Both are publicly posted under OSC case number D1-07-0367.
From the OIG Report:
The FBI notified ATF that, through an FBI informant, they had learned that a member of the Aryan Brotherhood was soliciting the contract murder of Dobyns on behalf of the Hells Angels. This solicitation reached the MS-13 (the informant’s gang) in the form of a “green light list” that approved the murder of Dobyns.
This information was immediately reported to then Phoenix ASAC Richardson with, “a sense of urgency…, because the source was a member of a violent gang and had provided an accurate description of Dobyns and his family”.
Later that day after receiving the threat information Richardson reported to ATF OPSEC that, “in his view, the threats have very little credibility considering the source.” Richardson told OIG investigators that he formed this conclusion based on information he had received from ATF agents in Phoenix.
(From OSC report to Congress and President Obama): “…Richardson insisted that (the informant) was not credible and would provide no useful information.”
(Back to the OIG report): “But when the OIG interviewed the agents identified by Richardson as having provided him with this information (that the source was without value), they denied having any involvement in this matter.”
The OPSEC branch complained that no one in Phoenix had done anything to resolve the threat. Richardson had made promises to investigate the threats but, “Richardson never followed through with his plan. Despite repeated prodding, Phoenix (Richardson) failed to complete the interviews.”
An independent investigation concluded that the AB, “has the information, resources and wherewithal to complete an ambush assault of Agent Dobyns…”
The OIG concluded that, “ATF’s response was inadequate, incomplete and needlessly delayed. In addition we (OIG) question whether it was appropriate for ATF (Richardson) to conclude that the information that the source had provided was not credible and that Dobyns faced no threat without first interviewing the individuals, who according to the source, had tried to arrange the contract hit on Dobyns.”
My assessment: In addition to highlighting Richardson’s nonchalant attitude toward death threats directed at an ATF agent, the reports indicate that Richardson lied to federal investigators. The reports also indicate that Richardson lied to one of his peers and further attempted to throw his own agents under the bus to displace accountability for his mismanagement of the situation.
Melson, Hoover, Chait and McMahon were fully aware of the content of these reports when they made Richardson their choice to be the SAC of Denver and picked him over several other qualified candidates.
What does this mean?
We learned earlier this week through the posting of the OSC/OIG investigation of ex-Atlanta SAC Vanessa McLemore that she was known to have lied to investigators in 1992. Seventeen years later she is the SAC of Atlanta and was removed from that position for again lying to federal investigators. Her excuse for lying was the same in both instances – she was allegedly trying to protect someone. Her credibility leads one to believe that this excuse also is a lie. She was lying to save herself from accountability for her own mismanagement.
Those who attended Melson’s last town hall meeting heard the “all is well” speech.
The cycle repeats.
I cite two open source public documents. They are the OSC and OIG reports of investigation conducted regarding ATF’s mismanagement of the original set of threats against ATF Special Agent Jay Dobyns. I am posting some critical elements of those documents that address the mismanagement of Richardson and draw question to how he was selected to a vacant SAC post. The OIG report is 21 pages in length, the OSC report is 11 pages in length. Both are publicly posted under OSC case number D1-07-0367.
From the OIG Report:
The FBI notified ATF that, through an FBI informant, they had learned that a member of the Aryan Brotherhood was soliciting the contract murder of Dobyns on behalf of the Hells Angels. This solicitation reached the MS-13 (the informant’s gang) in the form of a “green light list” that approved the murder of Dobyns.
This information was immediately reported to then Phoenix ASAC Richardson with, “a sense of urgency…, because the source was a member of a violent gang and had provided an accurate description of Dobyns and his family”.
Later that day after receiving the threat information Richardson reported to ATF OPSEC that, “in his view, the threats have very little credibility considering the source.” Richardson told OIG investigators that he formed this conclusion based on information he had received from ATF agents in Phoenix.
(From OSC report to Congress and President Obama): “…Richardson insisted that (the informant) was not credible and would provide no useful information.”
(Back to the OIG report): “But when the OIG interviewed the agents identified by Richardson as having provided him with this information (that the source was without value), they denied having any involvement in this matter.”
The OPSEC branch complained that no one in Phoenix had done anything to resolve the threat. Richardson had made promises to investigate the threats but, “Richardson never followed through with his plan. Despite repeated prodding, Phoenix (Richardson) failed to complete the interviews.”
An independent investigation concluded that the AB, “has the information, resources and wherewithal to complete an ambush assault of Agent Dobyns…”
The OIG concluded that, “ATF’s response was inadequate, incomplete and needlessly delayed. In addition we (OIG) question whether it was appropriate for ATF (Richardson) to conclude that the information that the source had provided was not credible and that Dobyns faced no threat without first interviewing the individuals, who according to the source, had tried to arrange the contract hit on Dobyns.”
My assessment: In addition to highlighting Richardson’s nonchalant attitude toward death threats directed at an ATF agent, the reports indicate that Richardson lied to federal investigators. The reports also indicate that Richardson lied to one of his peers and further attempted to throw his own agents under the bus to displace accountability for his mismanagement of the situation.
Melson, Hoover, Chait and McMahon were fully aware of the content of these reports when they made Richardson their choice to be the SAC of Denver and picked him over several other qualified candidates.
What does this mean?
We learned earlier this week through the posting of the OSC/OIG investigation of ex-Atlanta SAC Vanessa McLemore that she was known to have lied to investigators in 1992. Seventeen years later she is the SAC of Atlanta and was removed from that position for again lying to federal investigators. Her excuse for lying was the same in both instances – she was allegedly trying to protect someone. Her credibility leads one to believe that this excuse also is a lie. She was lying to save herself from accountability for her own mismanagement.
Those who attended Melson’s last town hall meeting heard the “all is well” speech.
The cycle repeats.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
