The False Claims Act uses the mandatory term "SHALL" more than thirty-five times. It cannot be misunderstood by the DOJ and FBI. The DOJ specifically keeps the Legislative History of Public Law 99-562 available in their reading room. This law also tells other people what they must do to prevent being "personally responsible" for additional fines, penalties, and jail time. It specifically "authorizes the Attorney General to conduct False Claims Act investigations for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has been engaged in any violations of a False Claims Act law."
        The plain text of the revised False Claims Act of 1986 states any and all successful qui tam relators must make a required "original source" disclosure within thirty days of first learning of the fraud against the government.
        This disclosure includes documents that normally prove what and how much they have disclosed. It also states that the relator (1) has up to six years (from the date of the violation) to file a private lawsuit and (2) will be entitled to a portion of any recovery or "proceeds of the action or settlement of the claim". This is true only if the lawsuit is successful and the relator is in compliance with each and every "False Claims Act" statutory requirement.
        The FBI is destroying these documents after three years. Obviously, this destroys the fairness, integrity and public reputation of judicial proceedings. See U.S. v. Daniels, 05/21/01, Re: 5th Amendment.
        Also, this places the relator in the position of being required to prove what he statutorily delivered to the government. Discovery or disclosure motions or orders are useless if the documents have been destroyed even before the relator is required to file the lawsuit.
        The FBI's internal "policy and custom" allows them to destroy a qui tam relator's disclosure documents, in federal qui tam or False Claims Act cases, 3 years after the required disclosure but before the 6 year statute of limitations which allows a Relator to file a qui tam case under the revised False Claims Act of 1986.
        In a successful qui tam lawsuit judgement or settlement, the FBI and DOJ have a conflict of interest regarding the sharing of the proceeds. They represent the relator's co-plaintiff, that is, the government agency that was defrauded.
        The DOJ has historically attempted to reduce the value of the total proceeds which include in-kind trades, forfeitures, and in many case, other unrelated administrative claims (against the government agency) being waived. Additional, "future, no-charge work" by the defendants has also been accepted by the government as a partial basis for settling some of these fraud-based lawsuits. Click Here to see what several Federal District Judges have already said about these unacceptable actions by the DOJ. It is no accident. The DOJ even has training guidelines on how to try to reduce the realtors' awards. Click Here to read the DOJ's internal manual rules for defeating what Congress passed as law.
        Amazingly, the more the relator helps recover for the taxpayers, the less the DOJ wants to pay them, despite what Congress passed as law. The plain text of this particular law uses the term "SHALL" more than thirty-five times in the first four sections. It can't be a simple mistake that the DOJ keeps repeating. Click Here to read the full text. THIS IS A DIRECT AND UNMISTAKABLE SLAP-IN-THE-CONGRESSIONAL-FACE BY THE DOJ!
        Historically the DOJ has tried to reduce the relator's proceeds percentage and total amount awarded. It is their statutory obligation to identify all "proceeds of the action or settlement of the case" to the court and return the majority of it to the Treasury Department's general account.
        A federal judge said "Perhaps the reason the litigation has been presented in this light is because the Government wants to minimize the contributions of the Relators in order to lower their ultimate award." Another judge said, "The Government tries, at a minimum, to require Relators to prove the allocations are in error without providing Relators with any discovery on the issue, although such discovery was reguested. This I cannot accept. I conclude on this issue, that the Relators are not bound by the allocations assigned by the Government as to the... and the... qui tam allegations. It is the Government that attempts to reduce the individual and total qui tam award shares by assigning particular values to various claims."
        I discovered the DOJ's pattern of misrepresenting the true nature of the total fraud recovery, documented it and on June 13, 1997, disclosed it, in accordance with the law.
        Can you guess who I had to disclose it to? Special Agent Jared von Bose of the Fort Worth, Texas, office of the FBI. The FBI is the designated investigative agency and represents the DOJ in these fraud disclosure matters. The Fort Worth office is supervised and managed by the Dallas, Texas, FBI office. It was headed by Special Agent In Charge Danny Defenbaugh. He has recently been in the news about the "undisclosed" McVeigh trial documents and has recently retired. Three years later (before my six year statute of limitation has expired) the FBI reports and documents, in writing, that no investigation was initiated and my disclosure documents have been destroyed. CLICK HERE to read their letters and listen to the taped conversations and answering machine recordings.
        Should I trust them? More to follow...