CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-01511 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-01511

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date1/22/2020
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Elizabeth M. Matchinski
Government Counsel: Alison P. O'Connell
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline E (personal conduct) and Guideline D (sexual behavior) due to past inappropriate sexual conduct. The Statement of Reasons detailed incidents from 2002 to 2008, including internet searches for pornographic images of underage females, sexual contact with his infant daughter, and an attempt to lure a teenage neighbor for sexual purposes. The Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudications Facility (DOD CAF) found these actions raised significant security concerns.
The applicant admitted to the behaviors outlined in the Statement of Reasons but argued that they were isolated incidents from over a decade ago, attributing them to immaturity and alcohol use. He provided a psychosexual evaluation that indicated no risk of pedophilia and claimed that he had since moved away from such behaviors. However, the administrative judge noted that the applicant's lack of candor during interviews and the nature of his past actions demonstrated a concerning pattern of behavior that could pose a risk to national security.
Ultimately, the administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance, citing the serious nature of the allegations and the applicant's failure to fully disclose relevant information during the investigation. The judge concluded that the applicant's past conduct, particularly while holding a security clearance, indicated a potential risk that was inconsistent with the national interest.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline DSexual Behavior · Against Applicant
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-01511

deniedJan 22, 2020· Hon. Elizabeth M. Matchinski· hearing

Summary

A 47-year-old software engineer, who previously held security clearances, was denied a security clearance based on concerns under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The denial stemmed from the applicant's engagement in inappropriate sexual conduct, specifically sexual contact with his infant daughter and internet searches for underage pornography.

Despite a clinical evaluation that did not indicate pedophilia, the applicant's actions were deemed inconsistent with national security interests. Further compounding these concerns was the applicant's lack of candor during the investigations, which significantly undermined his credibility.

The adjudicator cited Disqualifying Conditions AG ¶ 13(a), AG ¶ 13(c), AG ¶ 16(b), and AG ¶ 16(e). Ultimately, the combination of the inappropriate sexual behavior and the applicant's lack of honesty during the investigative process led to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior, including sexual contact with his infant daughter and internet searches for underage pornography.
The applicant's lack of candor during investigations undermined his credibility and raised security concerns.
The applicant's actions were deemed inconsistent with national security interests.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 13(a)appliedSexual Behavior of a Criminal Nature
AG ¶ 13(c)appliedSexual Behavior That Causes an Individual to Be Vulnerable to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress
AG ¶ 16(b)appliedDeliberately Providing False or Misleading Information
AG ¶ 16(e)appliedPersonal Conduct That Creates a Vulnerability to Exploitation

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 26, 2019
Answer filedAug 2, 2019
Hearing held—Decision issued after review of written record.
Decision dateJan 22, 2020

Cite For

Lack of Candor During Security Investigations Under Guideline E
Criminal Nature of Sexual Behavior Under Guideline D
Vulnerability to Coercion Due to Past Sexual Conduct

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.