I wasn’t 100% honest

This is a big mess and I am afraid that I may be in trouble. I’ve became romantically involved with a friend, who is a convicted felon, about a year ago and because we aren’t ready to label things, we still tell everyone we are just friends. My TS clearance renewal was due soon, I was concerned about how his background may affect me, so we became even more secretive about our “relationship,” even going as far as limiting when he spent time at my house, not allowing him to leave personal belongings at my house, etc (maybe a little overboard, I know). As far as anyone knows, we are still just friends. But during my reinvestigation, I didn’t mention him as a close associate or mention him at all.

A few months ago, he was arrested for a domestic battery against his ex-girlfriend. I can’t say what happened or not, I wasn’t there, but I am reconsidering the relationship (please don’t judge me, these things are never easy). He was going to trial, but finally accepted a plea. However, during this whole mess, my name came up because she was one of the few people who did know about us and also knows that we were keeping the relationship a secret because of my clearance review. She also shared knowledge of this information with the State’s Attorney as evidence relating the case and his lack of credibility. So, info about our relationship and why we are hiding it is in the court documents somewhere. Further, prior to this, I had a 6yr affair with a married man, which my boyfriend’s ex-girlfriend also knew about. This man was separated from his wife and she did know about us, so I never divulged that affair in my prior clearance investigations. He passed away why we were still together about 8 months prior to me getting involved with my friend.

Can any of this come back to haunt me? Should I just go ahead and come clean?

If you are worried about information getting found out by someone you become a CI concern, so yes, this could become an issue.


Thank you for the response, but I’m not clear on what you are saying. Please tell me what CI means.

CI means Counterintelligence. During the investigation interview every single issue that is discussed the investigator will ask can this be used against you for blackmail, pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress. If you are worried about the information falling into the wrong hands the answer to that question would be yes which makes you a CI concern because someone can get ahold of that information and use it to manipulate you to do something you would not normally do to include betraying your country, your government, your peers, and compromise sensitive, confidential, classified, private, privileged, or proprietary information. You become a target for espionage and a liability to our country.

1 Like

Did you answer anything dishonestly? I cannot recall all of the questions. Is there one about a relationship with a convicted felon? I know there is regarding foreign influence, etc.

It is irrelevant whether a specific question on the SF86 asks about her boyfriend or not. Questionable associations (which includes people involved in felonious behavior) is an issue. A sit down, face to face interview with an investigator is a requirement with a TS and there are additional questions asked that are not on the SF86. If you are honest with the investigator then the association will come out and be discussed whether listed or not.

If she lied then that is outright dishonesty. That is the reason I am asking.

Unless this person is a cohabitant then no, there is not a question on the SF86 that would flat out ask about his existence. The issue would be one to be discussed in the interview and if she wanted to list it on the SF86 it would go in the comment box at the end made for additional comments.

If she falsified her response in the SF-86, then continued to provide false information during the Subject Interview, under Title 18 she has committed at least two felonies. If the issue is developed during the investigation, it will be issue coded for adjudications. The customer agency should be notified prior to the case closing, resulting in a second Subject Interview to be completed during which time sue will be afforded the opportunity to change her previous responses before being confront with the developed issues. Regardless, the case will flagged as having Material, Intentional Falsification as well as involvement with questionable associations, as well as serious concerns regarding judgement. Strong chance of being denied a favorable suitability or security clearance decision. I am a former Adjudicator/Case Reviewer/Investigator. Seen this from every aspect.

Which question on the SF86 are you referring to because I am not thinking of one right off hand that pertains since he is not spouse, relative, cohabitant, foreign contact, former spouse, etc. I can only think of additional questions during the ESI that would be pertinent where yes, this would need to be reported.

I was speaking more in generalities regarding the process. I’m inclined to agree that while none of the SF-86 questions specifically ask about contacts with criminal associates, it will definitely be asked during the Subject Interview. Every person interviewed will be asked about involvement with questionable associates, as well judgement and trustworthiness. Being a reinvestigation, the number of people interviewed may vary based upon case type (T5R), whether any additional EFI Flags are met, etc.,. The key issue here is the relationship with a known criminal associate, as well as the previous affair. If either or both of these render her susceptible to blackmail or coercion, then she is a security risk. Bottom line for any adjudicator is when in doubt, error in the side of national security.

1 Like

As terrible as you are as a judgement of character and romantic relationships in general, this does not appear to fall under any investigative guidelines as far as I can tell nor are you required to list the boyfriend unless a foreign contact on your SF-86. That’s probably because they know boyfriends and girlfriends are usually fleeting contacts. It is concerning that you did not state that you asked your security office if you should list him or not. At the very least you could have asked. As far as hiding relationship from family or friends, that’s your personal problem and not a security concern.

That’s if she has a CI poly which she may never

What in the world are you talking about? It says you are responding to my comment. Every single TS DOES have a sit down with an investigator, that is not just for a CI with Poly. (Whatever that means, SCI perhaps?) I am a Full Time Investigator. I know what a TS requires because I do several of them in a month and it is my job to know.

You mentioned CI so I responded to it. You don’t need to have access to SCI to have a CI poly required (and it’s not TS specific).

CI, as I already explained stands for counterintelligence and ANY investigation can have CI concerns no matter the level. Now is there another aspect of my job you would like to teach me about? Or will that be all?


Bless your heart and Merry Christmas. I’d be concerned if you were an investigator. You seem to have some mental health issues. Have you reported your mental issues to your security office?

Merry Christmas to you too. If you notice other investigators have clicked the “heart” for my comments and not for yours. Bless your little heart as well for your blissful ignorance on the topic.

1 Like