CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-00799 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 22-00799

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

Case Profile
Decision Date3/28/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Marc E. Curry
Government Counsel: Daniel O'Reilly
Applicant's Counsel: John V. Berry
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 37-year-old systems engineer with a master's degree, who had been employed in the defense contracting industry since 2009. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline D (sexual behavior) and Guideline E (personal conduct) due to the applicant's admission of viewing child pornography between 2015 and 2017, which included disturbing images of minors. The SOR also alleged that the applicant had intrusive thoughts about underage girls and had falsified information on his security clearance application regarding an FBI investigation related to his viewing of child pornography.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to viewing child pornography but claimed it was inadvertent while browsing adult content. He acknowledged having intrusive thoughts about underage girls but asserted that these thoughts were not acted upon and were part of a psychological condition rather than a desire to harm children. The applicant had sought therapy and medication to address these issues, and a psychologist evaluated him, suggesting that his intrusive thoughts were indicative of obsessive-compulsive disorder rather than pedophilic interests. Despite these mitigating factors, the administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance, concluding that the applicant failed to sufficiently mitigate the security concerns raised by his past behavior and ongoing psychological issues.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline DSexual Behavior · Against Applicant
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For 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. 22-00799

deniedMar 28, 2024· Hon. Marc E. Curry· hearing

Summary

A 37-year-old systems engineer was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The applicant admitted to viewing child pornography, including images of children as young as one year old being molested. This conduct raised significant security concerns, with the judge finding the applicant's claims of inadvertent viewing not credible, especially given his admitted intrusive thoughts about underage girls.

Additionally, the applicant falsified a material fact on an Electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e-QIP) submitted on August 7, 2018. In the 'Additional Comments' section, he falsely stated he was "probed by the FBI in November/December 2018 in relation to an unspecified mental health condition."

The denial was based on the severity of the child pornography viewing and insufficient evidence of rehabilitation, as intrusive thoughts persisted until 2021. Disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 13(a) and AG ¶ 13(c) were raised, while mitigating condition AG ¶ 14(e) was applied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant viewed child pornography, including images of very young children, which raised significant security concerns.
The applicant's claims of inadvertently viewing child pornography were not credible, given his admitted intrusive thoughts about underage girls.
Insufficient evidence of rehabilitation was presented, as intrusive thoughts persisted until 2021.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 13(a)raisedSexual Behavior of a Criminal Nature
AG ¶ 13(c)raisedSexual Behavior That Causes Vulnerability to Coercion

Mitigating

AG ¶ 14(e)appliedSuccessful Completion of TreatmentThe applicant has been attending therapy and support groups, but the judge found this insufficient to mitigate the severity of the misconduct.

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 9, 2022
Answer filedFeb 3, 2023
Hearing heldOct 26, 2023
Decision dateMar 28, 2024

Cite For

Credibility of Claims Regarding Inadvertent Viewing of Child Pornography
Severity of Sexual Behavior Misconduct Under Guideline D
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation in Security Clearance Cases

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant viewed child pornography, including images of very young children being molested, which raised significant concerns under Guideline D. Despite the applicant's claims of treatment and a favorable psychological evaluation, the judge concluded that the applicant's behavior and thoughts about underage children posed a risk to national security, resulting in a denial of eligibility for a security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant viewed child pornography, including images of children as young as one year old being molested by adults.	Against Applicant	Child Pornography Involvement	Admitted	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline D). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant falsified a material fact on an e-QIP by stating he was probed by the FBI regarding a mental health condition. However, the judge ruled in favor of the applicant on this allegation, indicating that the falsification was not intentional. The overall outcome of the case was a denial of eligibility for a security clearance due to other serious concerns.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	You falsified a material fact on an Electronic Questionnaire for Investigations Processing (e-QIP), executed by you on August 7, 2018, when you wrote in the 'Additional Comments' section that you were 'probed by the FBI in November/December 2018 in relation to an unspecified mental health condition.'	For Applicant	Falsification Security FormNOT DELIBERATE	—	Denied	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline E). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

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