Summary
A 41-year-old field engineer and Air Force veteran was denied a security clearance under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) due to two incidents of voyeurism. The first occurred in May and June 1987, when the applicant, then 26 and serving in the USAF, admitted to secretly watching women shower in the female barracks on two or three occasions.
The second incident took place on October 24, 2005, when the applicant was arrested for invasion of privacy and resisting arrest after entering a military installation and looking into a female's guestroom window. The applicant admitted to both allegations of criminal conduct.
The judge determined that the recency and similarity of these offenses, spanning nearly two decades, demonstrated a concerning pattern of criminal behavior. Despite the application of some mitigating conditions, the applicant's lack of forthrightness regarding his past actions undermined his claims of rehabilitation and remorse, leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant admitted to both allegations of criminal conduct under Guideline J.
- The applicant's voyeuristic behavior in 1987 and 2005 demonstrated a pattern of criminal conduct that raised security concerns.
- The applicant's lack of forthrightness about his criminal behavior undermined his claims of rehabilitation and remorse.
Conditions Referenced
- J DC 31.araisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
- J DC 31.craisedAllegation or Admission of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged, Formally Prosecuted or Convicted
- J MC 32.arejectedSo Much Time Has Elapsed Since the Criminal Behavior Happened, or It Happened Under Such Unusual Circumstances That It Is Unlikely to Recur and Does Not Cast Doubt on the Individual’s Reliability, Trustworthiness, or Good JudgmentThe recency of the 2005 offense and its similarity to the 1987 offense raised ongoing concerns.
- J MC 32.drejectedThere Is Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation; Including, but Not Limited to the Passage of Time Without Recurrence of Criminal Activity, Remorse or Restitution, Job Training or Higher Education, Good Employment Record, or Constructive Community InvolvementThe applicant's equivocation about his criminal behavior and lack of transparency with his church community suggested insufficient rehabilitation.
Key Rule Quoted
“Criminal activity creates doubt about a person’s judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMay 14, 2008
- Answer filedMay 30, 2008
- Hearing heldSep 9, 2008
- Decision dateDec 23, 2008
Cite For
- Pattern of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
- Impact of Equivocation on Credibility in Security Clearance Cases
- Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation Despite Favorable Employment History