• AML
  • Qui Tam
  • SEC
  • CFTC
  • FCPA
  • FAQS
Subscribe
Donate
No Result
View All Result
Whistleblower Network News
The Truth at Any Cost.
Qui Tam, Compliance and Anti-Corruption News.
Whistleblower Network News
No Result
View All Result
Home Government Intelligence Community

Bullet-Lead Case Records and Stonewalling by the FBI

David ColapintobyDavid Colapinto
November 18, 2007
in Intelligence Community, News, Opinion
Reading Time: 6 mins read
Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInEmail

On November 18, 2007, the results of an investigation into the operations of the FBI crime lab were printed in the Washington Post and broadcast on CBS News 60 Minutes. The Forensic Justice Project (“FJP”), a project of the National Whistleblower Center, in Washington, D.C., and FJP Executive Director Dr. Frederic Whitehurst, cooperated with the joint Post-60 Minutes investigation by providing records released by the FBI to FJP and Dr. Whitehurst under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). These FBI FOIA records document the serious misconduct and other problems reported in the joint Post-60 Minutes investigation.

By way of background, since 1996 it has taken no fewer than three separate lawsuits filed on behalf of either Dr. Frederic Whitehurst or the Forensic Justice Project (or both) under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain records regarding FBI Laboratory scandals. In each and every case, the FBI has delayed and stonewalled the release of records documenting misconduct in the FBI Lab, including the problems identified in the Washington Post-60 Minutes investigation.

The FOIA cases are:

Register for National Whistleblower Day

1. Whitehurst v. FBI, Civil Action No. 96-572 (GK) (D.D.C.):

This was the original case filed on behalf of Dr. Whitehurst and it alleged that the FBI was refusing to process FOIA requests made on Dr. Whitehurst’s behalf in 1993 and 1995. These requests sought access to records about Dr. Whitehurst’s whistleblower allegations about serious problems in the FBI Lab, which also became the subject of a U.S. Department of Justice Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) review of the FBI Lab. Dr. Whitehurst’s lawsuit also alleged that records about Whitehurst and his allegations that were responsive to the FOIA requests were being selectively released by the FBI to criminal defendants, the courts, members of Congress, but were being denied to Dr. Whitehurst.

On February 5, 1997, Judge Gladys Kessler ordered the FBI to release all records responsive to these requests. See the order here

This lawsuit was later expanded to include Dr. Whitehurst’s FOIA requests for copies of the Justice Department’s OIG report and work product.

Ultimately, this lawsuit was settled and part of the settlement covered granting Dr. Whitehurst a fee waiver and access to thousands of pages of records on his whistleblower allegations and the FBI Lab scandal.

2. Forensic Justice Project v. FBI, Civil Action No. 04-1415 (PLF) (D.D.C.):

This FOIA case against the FBI was filed on behalf of the FJP in 2004 and requested access to records of various FBI Lab examiners who had testified in criminal cases regarding bullet lead. The case against the FBI was settled in March 2006, with the FBI agreeing to grant a fee waiver and provide the FJP with the names of defendants and case numbers of cases in which these examiners testified.

This FOIA case also was filed by the FJP against the DOJ for the records of DOJ Criminal Division Brady Task Force review of the FBI Lab scandal and Dr. Whitehurst’s whistleblower allegations. The FOIA case against DOJ on the Brady Task Force records was settled on December 9, 2005, with the DOJ agreeing to grant a fee waiver to FJP and produce on a rolling basis records from the Brady Task Force review.

The FJP provided all of these records to the Washington Post and these FBI records on bullet lead provided important leads for the Washington Post-60 Minutes investigation.

3. Forensic Justice Project and Whitehurst v. FBI and DOJ, Civil Action No. 06-1001 (RWR) (D.D.C.):

This FOIA action was filed in 2006 and is currently pending. See the Complaint

The FOIA request was filed with the FBI in September 2005 seeking copies of all records related to the comparative bullet lead cases and records related to the decision to stop using comparative bullet lead analysis that were referred to in a September 2, 2005 FBI press release. See the Original FOIA Request With FBI Press Release Attached

The FBI has refused to grant a fee waiver forcing the FJP and Dr. Whitehurst to appeal and then go to court. Reporter John Solomon of the Washington Post also wrote a letter informing the FBI and DOJ that he was interested in reviewing the records requested by FJP and Whitehurst. In February 2007 the FBI acknowledged that there exist approximately 250,000 records responsive to this request but the FBI demands that Dr. Whitehurst and the FJP pay approximately $70,000 to process this FOIA request.

The records responsive to this request are the actual case file records for all of the comparative bullet lead cases handled by the FBI Lab based on flawed science prior to the FBI’s decision to stop using comparative bullet lead analysis in criminal cases. In its September 2, 2005 Press Release, the FBI itself identified more than 500 cases where convictions were obtained using the scientifically flawed comparative bullet lead analysis. In addition, the FBI identified thousands of other criminal cases where comparative bullet lead analysis had been used prior to its discontinuance.

 

For more than a decade the FBI and the Justice Department have been sitting on records relating to serious misconduct on the part of FBI Lab examiners in scores of criminal cases.

Both the FBI and DOJ have dragged their feet in responding to FOIA requests forcing Dr. Whitehurst and the FJP to file three separate FOIA suits in federal court to get access to records about the government’s misconduct.

All of these records, should have been made public long ago. It should not have taken three FOIA suits to force the release of some of the records while the FBI continues to stall and prevent release of the FBI Lab’s case files where it misused scientifically flawed comparative bullet lead analysis in thousands of criminal cases.

Even worse is the secret process by which the DOJ reviewed Dr. Whitehurst’s whistleblower allegations about the FBI Lab’s serious misconduct.

It is only now, as more information comes to light as a result of these FOIA suits, that portions of the FBI’s misconduct in these are matters are being pieced together thanks to the investigative efforts and determination of the Washington Post, 60 Minutes, attorneys and groups like the Innocence Project and the Forensic Justice Project, and scientists like Bill Tobin and Dr. Frederic Whitehurst.

The FBI and DOJ should have disclosed all of this information to the courts as well as criminal defendants and their attorneys years ago. Instead, the DOJ and the FBI deliberately chose to operate in the dark, out of public view, and conceal the evidence that is scientifically flawed but which was still used in criminal cases. This has severely prejudiced people who have been hurt by the FBI Lab’s misconduct.

By stonewalling and delaying the release of this information, the FBI and DOJ have ensured that wrongfully convicted citizens are deprived of their right to appeal or seek post-conviction relief because the statute of limitations in many states have already likely expired.

David K. Colapinto
General Counsel
National Whistleblower Center

Tags: Bullet LeadDavid ColapintoFBI WhistleblowersFOIAForensic JusticeFrederic WhitehurstFreedom of Information Act (FOIA)Whistleblower News
Previous Post

Major FBI Whistleblower Story Breaking This Weekend

Next Post

Senate Committee Taking Action on Bullet-Lead Cases

David Colapinto

David Colapinto

Next Post

Senate Committee Taking Action on Bullet-Lead Cases

Please login to join discussion

Receive Daily Alerts

Subscribe to receive daily breaking news and legislative developments sent to your inbox.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Most Popular

Advocates Detail Need for SEC Whistleblower Reform

Raytheon Whistleblower Receives $1.5 Million for Alleging Cybersecurity Non-Compliance

Ruling Striking Down Trump Order Targeting Law Firm Seen as Crucial for Whistleblowers

MJH Healthcare Settles Whistleblower Allegations of Postal Rate Fraud for $2 Million

Poll Shows Overwhelming Support for Stronger Whistleblower Laws in Australia, Mirroring Polling in US

Four Whistleblowers Receive $1.3 Million for Alleging Genetic Testing Fraud Scheme

Whistleblower Poll

Whistleblower Poll
Whistleblower Poll

Exclusive Marist Poll: Overwhelming Public Support Among Likely Voters For Increased Whistleblower Protections

byGeoff Schweller
October 6, 2020

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

STAY INFORMED.
Subscribe to receive breaking whistleblower updates.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

About Us

  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Careers

Subscribe

  • Daily Mail
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • YouTube Channel

Contribute

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Submission Guidelines
  • Reprint Guidelines

Your Experience

  • Accessibility Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use

Help

  • Rules for Whistleblowers
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Advertise
Whistleblower Network News

Whistleblower Network News is an independent online newspaper providing our readers with up-to-date information on whistleblowing. Our goal is to be the best source of information on important qui tam, anti-corruption, compliance, and whistleblower law developments. 

Submit an Article

Copyright © 2025, Whistleblower Network News. All Rights Reserved.

This Newspaper/Web Site is made available by the publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this website, you understand that there is no attorney-client relationship between you and the Newspaper/Web Site publisher. The Newspaper/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

Become a Whistleblower Network News Subscriber

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Subscribe to WNN

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Subscribe to WNN
RSVP to National Whistleblower Day 2025! July 30, 2025 on Capitol Hill
RSVP NOW

Add New Playlist

No Result
View All Result
  • Exclusives
  • Government
    • False Claims-Qui Tam
    • Federal Employees
    • Intelligence
  • Corporate
    • CFTC & Commodities
    • Dodd-Frank
    • IRS & Tax
    • SEC & Securities
  • Features
  • Legislation
  • International
    • Foreign Corruption
  • Rewards
  • Whistleblower of the Week
  • Environment & Climate
  • Opinion
  • Editorial
  • Employment
    • Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers
    • Retaliation
    • OSHA
  • Make National Whistleblower Day Permanent
  • Media
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
    • Webinars
    • National Whistleblower Day
  • Whistleblower Poll
  • Whistleblower Resources
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Resources for Locating An Attorney
    • The New Whistleblowers Handbook

Copyright © 2024, Whistleblower Network News. All Rights Reserved.

Go to mobile version