AntiPolygraph.org
| Hart Nibbrigkade 22 | |
| 2597 XV The Hague | |
| Netherlands | |
| maschke @antipolygraph.org | |
| Thursday, 26 July 2001 |
JOHN E. ROBERTS
UNIT CHIEF, OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
J. EDGAR HOOVER BUILDING
935 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20535-0001
Dear Mr. Roberts:
I am writing to bring to your attention evidence that:
On 23 December 1998, Wolfgang Vinskey, a polygrapher employed with Department of Energy contractor Wackenhut Services, Inc., administered a counterintelligence-scope polygraph examination to Dr. Wen Ho Lee. Vinskey, supervisory reviewer Ron Fox, and quality control reviewer John Mata (a past president of the American Association of Police Polygraphists) all passed Dr. Lee with flying colors, unambiguously scoring his charts as "No Significant Response." But when the FBI wanted to search Dr. Lee's home, Special Agent Michael W. Lowe, assigned to the Albuquerque Division, Santa Fe Resident Agency, swore at para. 11 of an affidavit filed on 9 April 1999 in support of a search warrant, that:
...[f]ollowing the interview on December 23, 1998, DOE polygraphers administered a polygraph examination of LEE. The examiner's initial opinion was that LEE was not deceptive. However, subsequent quality control reviews of the
1
results, by both DOE and by FBI Headquarters (HQ) resulted in an agreed finding that LEE was inconclusive, if not deceptive, when denying he ever committed espionage against the United States.
On 26 September 2000, then FBI Director Louis J. Freeh and then U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, in a joint statement submitted for the record in a joint hearing of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on the Judiciary regarding the investigation and prosecution of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, similarly affirmed that:
The DOE polygraph examination, done by a contract polygrapher, focused on whether Dr. Lee had any unauthorized contacts or shared any classified information with unauthorized persons.... At the conclusion of the DOE contract polygraph on December 23, 1998, FBI agents on the scene were told that Dr. Lee had passed the examination. This was an opinion that FBI and polygraph experts from another agency later concluded was mistaken.
...
The FBI had requested and later received from DOE copies of the charts from Dr. Lee's polygraph examination of December 23, 1998. These were submitted to FBI Headquarters for review by the polygraph experts who do quality control for the FBI. The Polygraph Unit at FBI Headquarters did not receive the copies until January 28, 1999, because the FBI did not aggressively pursue receipt of the charts from DOE. After completing the internal review of the polygraph results on February 2, 1999, the FBI polygraphers who conducted a "blind" review concluded that Dr. Lee's response to the question whether he had ever committed espionage against the United States was at best inconclusive. Review by experts at another agency of government reached a similar conclusion. The FBI shared the FBI results with DOE immediately.
But on 26 January 2001, at the first public meeting of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Study to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph, Department of Energy polygraph program chief David M. Renzelman made statements that contradict SA Lowe's account as well as that of Mr. Freeh and Ms. Reno. Mr. Renzelman stated regarding the DOE polygraph examination of Dr. Wen Ho Lee:
...I would like to mention that you've been led to believe that several spy cases in the news have had dual calls or what have you. And let me tell you that the one that was referred to by, by Senator Bingaman, that it was reported as being truthful, and then later as untruthful, that's not the case. That was subjected to quality control, which this gentleman instituted in DOE in, I believe, the month of
2
January 1999, was it? When it came to quality control, it was determined this test is not finished. I made that determination, for him. And then I sent that test down to DoDPI [the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute] and I asked the director of DoDPI and his staff to review that test. They said, unanimously, "That test is not finished." I went to Ken Shull who's the director of the FBI polygraph program, and he said, "You're right." And they ran it again. Then it was finished. The news reported that test as truthful. DOE did not report that test as truthful.
Mr. Renzelman's remarks, transcribed above, begin about 13 minutes into a RealPlayer audio file that is available on the National Academy of Sciences website at:
http://video.nationalacademies.org/ramgen/dbasse/012601_4.rm
Mr. Renzelman emphatically stated that the Department of Energy's quality control review determined that Dr. Lee's DOE polygraph examination was "not finished" and that then FBI polygraph program chief Ken Shull (who has since retired) agreed.
Mr. Renzelman's contention that DOE ultimately concluded Dr. Lee's polygraph examination was "not finished" is supported by a 4 February 2000 CBS News report titled "Wen Ho Lee's Problematic Polygraph," which states:
The polygraph results were so convincing and unequivocal, that sources say the deputy director of the Los Alamos lab issued an apology to Lee, and work began to get him reinstated in the X-Division. Furthermore, sources confirm to CBS News that the local Albuquerque FBI office sent a memo to headquarters in Washington saying it appeared that Lee was not their spy.
But key decision-makers in Washington remained unconvinced.
Several weeks after the polygraph, the DOE decided to assign it the unusual designation of "incomplete."... (emphasis added)
This CBS News report is available on-line at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,157220-412,00.shtml
Mr. Renzelman's affirmation that Dr. Lee's DOE polygraph examination was "not finished" is clearly inconsistent with SA Lowe's sworn statement that "subsequent quality control reviews of the results, by both DOE and by FBI Headquarters (HQ) resulted in an agreed finding that LEE was inconclusive, if not deceptive, when denying he ever committed espionage against the United States."
3
Mr. Renzelman's affirmation is also inconsistent with former FBI Director Louis J. Freeh's 26 October 2000 [sic, correct 26 September 2000] congressional testimony that "the FBI polygraphers who conducted a 'blind' review concluded that Dr. Lee's response to the question whether he had ever committed espionage against the United States was at best inconclusive" and that "[r]eview by experts at another agency of government reached a similar conclusion." Mr. Renzelman specifically mentioned that FBI polygraph chief Ken Shull agreed that Lee's polygraph examination was "not finished."
I urge you to promptly conduct an investigation into these inconsistencies, and, in the interest of restoring public confidence in the FBI, to make the results of your investigation public. Specific questions that should be asked and answered include:
Sincerely,
[signed]
George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org
Note: a copy of this letter will be made available on AntiPolygraph.org:
http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-017.shtml
4
Copies to:
Honorable Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman, U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Honorable Orrin G. Hatch, Ranking Minority Member, U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Honorable Bob Graham, Chairman, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Honorable Richard C. Shelby, Vice-Chairman, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Robert S. Mueller III
Larry K. Parkinson, FBI General Counsel
Glenn A. Fine, U.S. Department of Justice Inspector General
Dr. Wen Ho Lee
Brian A. Sun, Esq.
Shawn Efran, CBS News
5