This is a question that’s not applicable to me, but I am curious to find out the answer. Suppose person X is filing for sf86. May be that person X used some crack 20 years ago and no one knows about it or went to see some escort, and no one know about it. While investigation how will the BI finds out this information if applicant doesn’t disclose this type of info. I know the BI are really smart, but they don’t have crystal balls. Thanks.
If nobody knows, why are you the one asking?
2 Likes
The fact is, we (Investigators) may NOT find out. We are relying on people being honest, the Subject first of all, and of course the Sources we interview.
So yea, if Subject did crack once, 20 years ago, alone or with people he no longer associates with, there is a good chance we will never uncover it.
Here is the rub.
On the SF 86 (the intro part that very few people actually read) and verbally prior to one’s personal interview, you are made aware of the fact that "Title 18, Section 1002 of the US Criminal Code provides that knowingly falsifying or concealing a…fact is a felony which may result in fines and/or up to 5 years imprisonment. " It goes on to say that one can be fired, disqualified. etc, etc, and that this remains a part of your record for future placements.
That’s a pretty hefty risk.
Sure some people get around it and lie. My personal opinion is if they are gonna lie once, they will lie again and it WILL catch up with them. Sorta like a bank robber. If they robbed one bank and one bank only, there’s a better chance they’ll get away with it. Problem is, keep robbing, more evidence builds up and eventually their own greed does them in.
It’s not a perfect system. We do the very best we can.
1 Like
I do have a crystal ball, just ask my teenager! Lol
1 Like
When my now adult children were early teens they were convinced that my job gave me the ability to tell if they were lying or not…sorta like a super power. Truth is, they were horrible liars and any parent with two brain cells would have caught onto them. But I let them think I had some super skill, honed by years of federal training conducted covertly in far away places, that made me a human lie detector. : )
4 Likes
Don’t the investigators look into internet/phone message history? There might some clue somewhere I believe. At what point internet/message history is checked? I am sure some agencies track all the keyboard hits for all Americans somewhere.
Ohhh, if only!
I do have to point out that in your initial post you mentioned just being curious. Now you use the phrase “there might be some clue somewhere I believe.” So these are the types of things we pick up on.
If in fact person X used crack 20 years ago, unless they held a clearance AT THE TIME OF THE USE, they would answer NO to the questions in section 23; Illegal Use of Drugs and Drug Activity. The questions (and you can google SF86 to verify my information) all have a 7 year time span except for 23.3 which is an EVER time frame and asks about drug use or other illegal involvement with a drug while possessing a security clearance.
If there are agencies tracking every key stroke of every American well, that would be a front page WaPo story for sure. They certainly are keeping a lid on it, and not sharing that information with background investigators.
My best piece of advice is to read the questions carefully and answer honestly. 20 year old information would only be applicable for the handful of “ever” questions (including drug use while cleared, being charged with any offense related to alcohol and/or drug, felony charges, offenses related to firearms or explosives, domestic violence charges, financial problems due to gambling…I may have missed a few…)
2 Likes
You seem to be fishing for info and @SMCVA is falling for it hook, line, and sinker. The way we do or do not develop information is not information you need to know… what you DO need to know is the release you signed for your investigation gives me the right to seek information wherever needed and your job is to tell the truth.
1 Like
If someone used crack 20 years ago and nothing since, there would be no point in lying about it. Enough time has passed that this alone would be extremely unlikely to disqualify a person from obtaining a clearance.
Unless they held a clearance 20 years ago, but yes, otherwise it’s pointless to lie about it.