ISCR Case 08-07383.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-07383.h1

deniedJul 1, 2008· Hon. Juan J. Rivera· hearing

Summary

A 58-year-old senior security business consultant was denied a security clearance under Guidelines D (Sexual Behavior), E (Personal Conduct), and J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from his past use of child pornography between 1998 and February 2005. Specifically, the applicant knowingly accessed, viewed, and downloaded images of underage girls engaged in sexual activity from the internet, using them for sexual gratification.

The judge determined that the seriousness of these offenses was not mitigated by the passage of time. During the hearing, the applicant minimized his past behavior, which was seen as evidence of a lack of reliability, judgment, and trustworthiness. Furthermore, the applicant's denials regarding prior admissions to government agents were found not credible.

Despite the applicant expressing remorse and claiming rehabilitation, the judge concluded that these factors, combined with his lack of candor during the security process, undermined his overall reliability and trustworthiness. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant's use of child pornography from 1998 to February 2005 was deemed serious and not mitigated by time.
The applicant minimized his behavior during the hearing, indicating a lack of reliability and judgment.
The applicant's denials of prior admissions to government agents were found not credible.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 16(e)raisedPersonal ConductEngaging in activities which, if known, may affect the person’s personal, professional, or community standing.
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal ConductA single serious crime or multiple lesser offenses.
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedCriminal ConductAllegation or admission of criminal conduct, regardless of whether the person was formally charged.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 17(e)appliedPersonal ConductThe applicant presented evidence of taking positive steps to reduce vulnerability to exploitation.
AG ¶ 17(c)rejectedPersonal ConductThe applicant's serious felony offenses continue to cast doubt on his judgment and reliability.
AG ¶ 17(d)rejectedPersonal ConductThe applicant minimized his illegal behavior and recanted prior admissions.

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for a security clearance is predicated upon the Applicant meeting the criteria contained in the revised adjudicative guidelines.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedFeb 9, 2009
Answer filedMar 16, 2009
Hearing heldJun 22, 2009
Decision date—

Cite For

Seriousness of Past Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Lack of Candor Affecting Reliability Under Guideline E
Mitigating Conditions Not Applicable Due to the Nature of the Offenses Under Guideline D.

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant’s use of child pornography from 1998 to February 2005 is not mitigated by the passage of time. His favorable evidence hardly outweighs the seriousness of his offenses. He minimized his questionable behavior during his hearing, showing that he lacks reliability, judgment, and trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	Child Pornography Involvement	Admitted	(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted (b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop (c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress (d) sexual behavior of a public nature or that reflects lack of discretion or judgment	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶13)

Mitigating applied (¶14)

Mitigation

3.a

Applicant’s use of child pornography from 1998 to February 2005 is not mitigated by the passage of time. His favorable evidence hardly outweighs the seriousness of his offenses. He minimized his questionable behavior during his hearing, showing that he lacks reliability, judgment, and trustworthiness.

Against Applicant

Child Pornography Involvement

Admitted

(a) sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted

(b) a pattern of compulsive, self-destructive, or high-risk sexual behavior that the individual is unable to stop

(c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress

(d) sexual behavior of a public nature or that reflects lack of discretion or judgment

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant knowingly accessed, viewed, and downloaded from the Internet images of underage girls who were engaged in sexual activity.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
1.b	Applicant used the images for his own sexual gratification and masturbated while viewing the images.	Against Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Admitted	(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—
1.c	Applicant denied that he was denied access to classified information by another government agency in June 2005, as alleged in SOR ¶ 1.c.	Against Applicant	Lack of Candor in Interview	—	Denied	(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant knowingly accessed, viewed, and downloaded from the Internet images of underage girls who were engaged in sexual activity.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

1.b

Applicant used the images for his own sexual gratification and masturbated while viewing the images.

Against Applicant

Questionable Judgment General

—

Admitted

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

1.c

Applicant denied that he was denied access to classified information by another government agency in June 2005, as alleged in SOR ¶ 1.c.

Against Applicant

Lack of Candor in Interview

—

Denied

(e) personal conduct or concealment creating vulnerability to exploitation

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant knowingly accessed, viewed, and downloaded from the Internet images of underage girls who were engaged in sexual activity. He used the images for his own sexual gratification and masturbated while viewing the images.	Against Applicant	Sexual Offense Criminal	Conduct No Charge	Denied	(e) discharge or dismissal from the Armed Forces under less than honorable conditions	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant knowingly accessed, viewed, and downloaded from the Internet images of underage girls who were engaged in sexual activity. He used the images for his own sexual gratification and masturbated while viewing the images.

Against Applicant

Sexual Offense Criminal

Conduct No Charge

Denied

(e) discharge or dismissal from the Armed Forces under less than honorable conditions

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES