So, I was at work today and I get an email from a BI investigator to call her about my BI. I call and she ask me about what happened when I shoplifted back in the year 2000. Problem is I did not shoplift, the guy I was with shoplifted a pack of cigarettes. Mind you we are on a military base as well. So, plain clothes in the store catches the guy I was with and they have us watch the sec. cam that caught him doing it. The MPs show up and aks us to go with them to the MP station. No handcuffs, not put into a cell, actually sat in a lobby/waiting room (chairs and magazines). They did not fingerprint us, or question us. They even let us stay in this lobby together. In less than an hour my platoon sergeant comes down and we are free to go. The other guy even admitted to someone that I had nothing to do with him stealing the pack of cigs which he acted on his own. I do recall after the incident my platoon sergeant and I went to see the Corps Sergeant Major and my platoon sergeant spoke for me and I got to speak and the SgtMaj cleared me of any wrongdoing. The guy I was with I know was in a lot of trouble for something before and he ended up becoming a deserter a few weeks later. I on the other hand was never brought in to court for this incident of the cigs. So, since I got out of the Army in 2005, I have worked for 3 Fed gov entities, 1 being the U.S. Border Patrol, which requires a secret clearance or at least that is what I had. Point being this issue was never brought up in that BI and I was not even aware that I was charged with anything. However, with the Fed agency I am with now it requires a regular BI nothing fancy and this stuff of me having a charge comes up over a pack of cigs which I did not steal. I found out about this at work this morning and was not able to work all day because I have been freakin out about it. I'm afraid I could lose my job now because if I do have a charge on my record than wouldn't that be lying on all my past and current BI's? The only things I have done so far is write a statement to the lady saying I did not shoplift and that I was not aware that I was even charged with anything. I asked her to provide copies of any documents that claim this of me, but she has not done so yet. I also call the Army CID records keeping and requested any records on me for the time frame that this had happened on. Besides that I have no clue where to go from there. The other thing being I am in the hiring process for one of the 3 letter Fed LE agencies and something like this can totally screw my day. If there is a charge on my record I don't think I want it expunged because that will still show something happened and it is the Fed anyway they'll look at it no matter what. Someone please help. Thank you.

Why did YOU have to go in front of the Sergeant Major if you were cleared from the security camera? Why didn't the MP's let you go on your own merit?

Did you receive an Article 15 for aiding and abetting, shoplifting, or any other offense related to this incident? If so, what was the “official charge”? You said you were cleared of any wrongdoing, so I already know the outcome. But what was the charge?

Did you have top secret security clearance at the time of this incident? Did something happen since that time that would cause you to lose the clearance? Does your current position or the job that you are applying for require it?

Are you afraid of losing the clearance and thus your job?

What exactly is your question?

I went to see the SgtMaj after the other guy admitted he had acted on his own. I was told that the SgtMaj wanted to see me, so we had a sit down and he cleared me of any wrong doing. I did not sign anything, he did not hand me anything. From what I recall the MPs did not review the sec cam themselves. It is possible that they did, but again I don't recall.

I did not receive an Article 15 for anything related to this incident. As for the "official charge," from what the BI lady, SHE told me it was a charge for shoplifting. This however was the first time I have ever heard that I had a charge. No one informed me or gave me papers at the time this issue occurred.

I did not have any kind of sec. clearance at the time. I've never had any type of clearance until I joined the Border Patrol which was years later and had "secret" clearance through them, yet this issue never came up in my pre-hire with them or during my tenure with the BP. Currently I am a Federal Investigator in a "public trust" position that does not require a sec. clearance. I have never filled out an SF85 or SF86 saying I had been charged with a crime at time in my life, because I had never been informed that I was charged with anything ever before.

My questions are... What boggles my mind is why was this not addressed before when I was in the BP? What do I need to do? For the current position I am in I had to fill out an SF-85, which (even if a charge exists in my name) asks, "In the last 7 yrs, have you been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of any offense(s)?" Again, (even if a charge does exists in my name) this issue is over 7 years old. So why are they even looking into it and asking for a statement from me on it?

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my issue.

Forgot another question. I am currently in another Fed hiring process and BI filling out is coming up soon. What should I be putting in that SF-86 when it asks about past records?

I figured as much on the shoplifting. But you say you don't recall so I really don't want to get into that any further.

Whether you want to believe it, you have a criminal record with the military. If the BI found it, ten years after the fact, then apparently there is something to find. As for the BP, you had a different BI investigator period. Obviously this investigator knows how to do the job right.

Are you operating under the assumption that because it was a “sit down” with the Sergeant Major, that you did not receive a reprimand? Apparently you did receive a reprimand, and that is what the BI investigator found.

I'm sure you already know if there is any discrepancy between a current SF-86 form and an old one, you will have to answer for that and it could result in denial of employment or worse.

So, now that you are aware that this offense does appear on your military record, STOP concealing this on your SF-86. According to the U.S Criminal Code (title 18, section 1001), the penalty for knowingly falsifying or concealing a material fact on an SF-86 is a felony.

Hopefully you don't get charged with anything as a result of this investigation.

The following link is for your review:

http://www.opm.gov/Forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf

If you truly had no idea this existed, then you really need to obtain copies of your military record pronto.

Whether I received a reprimand is still to be found out, I know I did not get any trouble for this issue. It was my understanding that after speaking with the SgtMaj and the other guy had admitted he acted on his own I was in the clear. Especially since no adverse action was taken against me afterwords.

I do agree may be the BI before just weren't doing it right and that is why it possibly never came up.

I am fully aware of the penalty under U.S Criminal Code (title 18, section 1001). I have not concealed anything. Everything before 20 Jan 2010, I had no knowledge of at all that I had a charge by my name. Nor do I plan on concealing it either.

The first thing I did after I got off the phone with the lady on Friday was put in a request for my military records from CID (I am now just waiting for them to get back with me). I have also consulted an attorney, and she had gave me a list of questions to find out first before getting an attorney involved. The attorney told me to run a background/criminal check on myself (I have not done this yet because I am trying to find the most reliable and informative company). She did mention that I may have been "titled" with the charge simply because I was with the other guy even though I did not commit any crime. As for the "titling" bit I can have an Army Board review it for correction, but that takes 8-10 months (doesn't mean I'm not going to do it, I'm just stating that it is a long process). The attorney advised to review my DD-214 and look for anything that may mention anything of this issue and there is not. I completed my full-service contract and got out on an Honorable discharge. I was out for a year and even came back in to do a few years of service in both the Army Reserve and National Guard. In which both times during those criminal/background checks (to which I stated I had never been charged or convicted of a crime), I got in with no problem and the issue was never brought up then either.

Now I do wonder because from what I have read through other posts and websites; that not all background/criminal checks are the same (at least they do not all report the same information). So, (and I may be wrong) is it possible that in the past during all of my other BI/criminal checks this issue was seen by the BI and the BIs conducting them gave it a more in depth look and did see that I did not do anything wrong? And the lady doing this current BI she ran a BI on me and only saw the surface of this issue and did not give it an in depth look to see that I was cleared of any wrong doing? Again, I agree that maybe the BI that did my USBP BI did not do his job correctly, but I have been through the SF-85/86 game 5 times for previous positions that I have held not including the current one which would make it 6. It is just kind of hard to imagine that 5 out of 6 times all those BI did not do their job correctly. Again, it is possible, but 5 out of 6 is pushing it.

Also, like I had mentioned before that I am currently in an application process for another Fed position, they have already ran my criminal check and nothing came up, but the BI step of the process has not started yet. I am just wondering what is it they look at/don't look at in that criminal check in the beginning that would be any different from when you do your BI step?

Thank you for discussing this issue with me and your input is greatly appreciated.

Reprimands, trouble or adverse actions, that's all trivial now. This incident has made it to your permanent record. That's all that really matters at this point.

A “sit down” with the SgtMjr could be construed as a verbal reprimand, which is still official. Just because someone doesn't receive punishment for a crime doesn't mean a crime wasn't committed, it just means they weren't punished. This should have never made it to your permanent record, but it did. Titling may or may not be the issue. But the fact that your name is involved in anything related to shoplifting is a red flag in my opinion. Especially in a position of government.

It is always interesting for me to hear someone say that the other investigators didn't find it therefore it must not exist. The fact that you are not alerting the investigators is really where the problem begins and ends. I can't express that enough. The current investigator found this without you alerting her. The whole purpose of the 85/86 is to find discrepancies. I can only suggest if you are SSBI that you report this on any and all SF-85/86 until the end of 2010. However, just because you are only legally obligated to disclose this information for up to 10 years doesn't mean it can't be found. On the surface the investigator saw a shoplifting charge. I have a hard time believing that she wasn't able to also immediately see the disposition. Possibly she threw it out there to see if you would bite, but I don't believe that either. How she found it in the first place is what you should be concerned with. You stated you did not report this on any 85/86 before. That I believe will soon become an issue.

As you are able to re-enlist, apparently the military has no problem with the way your file reads, but your current investigator does have a problem with it. Hopefully the current investigator will research and find that you were not involved. However, it seems to me that your main concern right now is the 7/10 disclosure, which leads me to believe that maybe I am missing part of the story. Nonetheless, how you proceed is your call. Whether you divulge this on your 85/86 is up to you. You said you had been through this 6 times before. Then you don't need me to tell you that you might have to stop the hiring process until you get this cleared up, if that is possible.

As for the Review Board, I have seen people go before the Board and win, but under different circumstances. However 8-10 months is really a small price if you succeed.

I feel strange explaining this to you considering you were BP, but there really is no difference between a criminal BI and a standard BI. When someone says they are running your BI, the criminal area is simply the area that is looked at first. Why, because it's the easiest. It's always best if you can find something to disqualify the applicant up front.

At this point I would consider what you are doing a privilege, and I would try to have this rectified asap.