suspect then, might have a good defense. Work with PFA. Otherwise, you could spend months
investigating an allegation that would not result in a successful prosecution.
The Procurement Fraud Advisor (PFA) must be in on the case at a very early stage. It is
essential that you work with the PFA prior to any meetings you have with the U.S. Attorney. The PFA is
your point of contact (POC) for coordinating with DOJ. This coordination is essential whether the
offender is military or civilian. Remember, the Defense Procurement Fraud Division is the "single
centralized organization within the Army to coordinate and monitor criminal, civil, contractual, and
administrative remedies in significant cases of fraud or corruption relating to Army procurement." (AR
27-40, paragraph 8-2c.) Even if the case doesn't involve procurement, coordination with PFA is still
8. Packaging the Case. You have to sell your product. You must convince the U.S. Attorney
that the case is one that is worth his time and effort. It is important for you to put the investigative
product into a format that will lead to the result you want: prosecution and conviction. If the U.S.
Attorney does nothing with the case, and if this is simply the result of the way you presented the matter
to him, then the interests of justice have not been served.
Guidelines for putting the package together are at CID Regulation 195-26. Paragraph 2-8
explains that "the investigator must be able to present his product in written form and organized in a
way that permits efficient access to all information and evidence important to the case. Even the best
case is likely to be declined if it is poorly organized and presented (whether in writing or orally). It is the
investigator's responsibility to organize the material to enable the prosecutor to make his decision; it is
not the prosecutor's responsibility to exhaustively examine papers and question the investigator to
determine what should have been clearly presented to him in the first place. Also, the investigator
"should be sure that he has gathered as much evidence as possible...The investigator must be able to
demonstrate clear awareness of the legal elements of the case and have admissible, competent, and
persuasive evidence on each such point." Also, the investigator must "carefully and explicitly
distinguish between his suppositions and the facts he has established by investigation." Paragraph 2-2
also notes the need for an investigative plan and the need for SJA coordination, points which have
already been discussed.
In these cases, you need to explain just what the offenses are, and what you have to prove
them. How does it prove them? What is obvious to you may not be so obvious to someone who has
not been living with the case for the past 11 months. You may have hundreds of witness interviews,
thousands of documentary exhibits, and various other forms of evidence such as photographs. If you
and the prosecutor have been working on the case together, putting the package together will not be
that onerous a task.
Do not assume the trial counsel or prosecutor will understand the intricacies of your case.
He may know nothing about computer technology,