Skip to main content

U.S. Army Sergeant Pleads Guilty to Bribery and Money Laundering Conspiracy Related to Department of Defense Contracts in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Army Sergeant deployed to Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, pleaded guilty today to bribery and a money laundering conspiracy arising out of her work administering transportation services, the Department of Justice announced today. The Army Sergeant has agreed to pay $90,000 in restitution to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and to cooperate with the Department of Justice’s ongoing investigation.

According to the charges, filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Ana C. Chavez accepted $90,000 in cash and wire transfers as a bribe from a DOD contractor in return for Chavez exercising her influence at the Transportation Operations Support Office in the award of DOD contracts and work orders to that contractor’s company. Chavez gave a portion of the bribe proceeds to another DOD contractor working at Bagram Airfield, with whom she conspired to launder the money through various bank accounts held by Chavez’s associates in the United States. According to the court documents, the alleged conduct began at least in or about February 2005 and continued until September 2006.

Chavez pleaded guilty to one count of bribery and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. A violation of the bribery statute carries a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 or three times the value of the bribe. A violation of the money laundering conspiracy statute carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a fine of $500,000 or twice the value of the laundered funds. The maximum fine could be increased to twice the gain derived from the crimes or twice the loss suffered by the victims of the crimes if either of those amounts is greater than the statutory maximum fine.

Today’s charges are the result of an ongoing investigation prosecuted by the Antitrust Division’s National Criminal Enforcement Section (NCES), with assistance from the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs. The investigation of this case is being conducted by the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (Army CID) and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations. Additional assistance was provided by the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigations Division.

Today’s charges are an example of the Department of Justice’s commitment to protect U.S. taxpayers from procurement fraud through the National Procurement Fraud Task Force. The National Procurement Fraud Initiative, announced in October 2006, is designed to promote the early detection, identification, prevention and prosecution of procurement fraud associated with the increase in contracting activity for national security and other government programs.

Anyone with information concerning illegal conduct in the procurement of goods or services involving DOD contracts in Afghanistan is urged to contact NCES at 202-307-6694 or antitrust.complaints@usdoj.gov; DCIS at 800-424-9098 or hotline@dodig.mil; or Army CID at http://www.cid.army.mil.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...