Naval Criminal Investigative Service Headquarters ATTN: Inspector General, Code 001 716 Sicard Street SE Suite 2000

Washington Navy Yard, DC 20388-5380

September 12,2009

Inspector General Mulligan,

I am again writing to you following up on my letter dated July 9,2009 Certified Mail 7WS&i0800057il78Sii4 reeetvedJuly i&, 2009, since I have yet to receive a response from that letter. From your letter, dated May 15,2009, you stated "I will evaluate the information you have provided and take the action i deem appropriate". May S ask hew the investigation •Tito the misconduct allegation I presented to you is progressing? I have not heard anything from you since that letter, t now have sent three (3) separate letters to you, with only 1 response to the first letter. 1 referred to documents from the Family Advocacy Program (FAP) that were absent from the case file I received and the fabrication of a "confession" by Special Agent Eric Muetenberg. •After doing some research I discovered that the FAP was never involved with the investigation and as of January 30,2008,3 % years after the report of the child sexual assault that was reported to agents at Parris Island and Camp Pendleten, the FAP was still not aware of the allegations. Would this not be considered agent misconduct? Does this not constitute a violation of DoO Directive 6400.1? And if I'm not mistaken, this is also a violation of state and federal reporting requirements with regards to the sexual assault of a child. i also found it extremely interesting that NCIS has finally revised their policy of recording interviews. It must be because of the stigma that NCIS carries in the military justice systembeing untruthful to suit one's needs. It's too bad it came this late; others have been doing it for years to control the possibility of lies told by agents. Tell me, is it policy for your agents to conduct interviews alone? Would this not only add to reasonable doubt in a case, but also caU into question the integrity of NCIS as a whole? As stated in your letter dated May 15, you directed me to address any further correspondence to your attention. Per you request, I have enclosed copies of the following:

Results of Interrogation from Special Agent Eric Muelenfaerg dated 5/27/05

FACT: Special Agent Muefenberg's recounting of Edwin's "alleged" confession does not match what B Skovranko said happened, in fact, the information Special Agent Mueienberg supplied at trial was the complete opposite of what Hr said happened

Special Agent ftfotelenfaerg's opinion of the polygraph results

FACT: Special Agent Mueienberg wrote the results of the polygraph examination, and stated "after chart evaluation, prior to NCIS final quality control review, the examiners opinion was that deception was indicated based on s/ehlers' physiological responses to the relevant questions."

» Chart from Special Agent Muelenberg's polygraph interview log FACT; On this paper, Special Agent fVtuefenberg makes reference to 4 charts. He states P 1:18, 1:23, P4:15. One would conclude that these are 3 or the 4 results from the 4 polygraphs conducted. Correct me if I'm wrong, P would indicate PASS, and I would indicate Inconclusive. Edwin's polygraph with NCfS Agent Mueienberg was not video or audio taped and has since disappeared.

Polygraph conducted in January 2008 by Mr. Paul Redden of the San Diego Police Department FACT: Mr. Redden interviewed and had a polygraphed Edwin on January 30, 2008. This polygraph was video and audio recorded and the results were supplied to Attorney Michael Eisenberg. Mr. Redden, and three (3) other examiners quality checked the results and unanimously can to the same conclusion-Edwin was telling the truth when he denied the allegation made against him by H Skovranko and her family. This would undermine NCIS' polygraph because 1) NCIS' polygraph has disappeared, so we will never know the truth as to what it really said and 2) this one made it to a quality control whereas NCIS' did not.


Report of Investigation (ROD dated 8/1/06

Tliis ROI states that Edwin maintained his innocence throughout both interrogations, ft says that he was deceptive to the relevant questions asked by Special Agent Muelenberg, but does not mention a confession. Could Special Agent Muefenberg possibly be lying? i would have to believe so considering that he and case manager Special Agent Art Spafford have been less than honest in their involvement with this case.

My letters to Special Agent Crandall apprising him of this situation in January 2009 ! contacted Parris Island NCIS in December 2008. in January 20091 sent Special Agent Crandall a certified letter, with the evidence provided to you, apprising him of the situation. Special Agent Crandall, after being employed by NCIS for over 25 yrs, as he had stated to me over the phone in December 2008, he would have known that he was required to report the agent misconduct, yet he failed to do so.


RP2 Paul Skovranko's sworn statement dated 6/3/04

RP2 Skovranko stated to NCIS agents on June 3, 2004 'm a sworn statement that he took his child to the Beaufort Naval Hospital and was refused treatment, FACT: Petty Officer Skovranko did not take his daughter to the Beaufort Naval Hospital on June 2, 2004, or anytime in the month of June 2004.

Documentation from a FOIA request sent from Edwin's attorney Michael Eisenberg to IT Adam Burch at the Beaufort Naval Hospital regarding RP2 Skovranko's admission to NCtS that he took his daughter there the night of June 2.2004 FACT; No such visit to the hospital by ¥ Skovranko exists in the month of June 2004. H Skovranko was only seen at the Beaufort Naval Hospital in the month of July 2004,

Family Advocacy Program (FAP1 letter dated January 28. 2008 stating they have never received a report of the allegations of a sexual c sauftinvolviniiH A. Skovranko FACT: Per OoO Directive 6400.1, the Famify Advocacy Program, they (FAR) are required to be involved with All sexual assault investigations involving a minor child, NCIS also failed to contact the local authorities and social services.


Randi Hester's statement to NCIS dated June 23.2004

Randi Hester, at the time was a 13 yr oW minor, who was instructed by H; 's mother Stacey to question H about being sexually assaulted, Randi stated to NCIS that F refused to say anyone's name only that "her mommy would be mad at her". Per Randi's statement ta NCIS it was Stacey (H 's mother) who stated that it was Mr. Eddie who did this to you and not H Stacey TOLD ? conversation. : it was Edwin who did this to her and Randi was witness to thfe


Hi Skovranko's NCtS interview dated 6/9/04 where she states Gloria and James were a witnesses to the alleged sexual assault

fACT: Gloria Enters and a minor named James, were never questioned about witnessing the alleged sexual assault. At trial, Gloria Ihlers stated she did not know about the allegations against her until just before taking the stand. She also stated that if H accused her, then she was being untruthful, because she (Gloria) did not witness anything. After my previous fetter, f discovered (as J do just about everyday) more things NCIS agents failed to do, I'm curious if you have heard of SECNAVINST 5520.3B-criminal and security investigations and related activities within the Oept of the Navy? This instructions says that NCIS shall comply with the referral reporting, and conferra! requirements of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense (DoD) relating te the investigation of certain crimes. This manual covers DoD Directive 6400.1 FAP, and federal/state reporting requirements of child sexual assault, The MOU states that under section B of the policy "the Department of Defense {DoD) has responsibility for the integrity of rts programs, operations, and installations, and for the discipline of the armed forces. Prompt administrative actions and completion of investigations within the two (2) year statute of limitations under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

require the Department of Defense to assume an important roie in federal criminal investigations" The investigation into the allegations made by H; Skpvranko took over 3 years. Can you explain the elongated time gap between the first report on June 3,2004 to the conviction on August 21,2007? How about the fact that Gloria Johnson-Hester-Shlers was accused of witnessing this sexual assault, neither questioned nor brought up on charges? The fvlOU goes on to say "that crimes committed on a military installation where one or more subjects who are not subject to UCMJ the DoD investigative agency (being NCJS in this ease) will provide immediate notice of the matter to the appropriate Department of Justice investigative agency." The MOU states in ifs supplemental guidance that "purposes of required notice to the DoJ only if the offence falls within the prosecutoriai guidelines of the local US attorney", Meaning-NCIS has to notify the DQJ and civilian authorities per this directive, but also falls under the DoD Directive 6400.1. Another DoD Directive 1 found interesting is 5525.5-cooperation with civilian law enforcement officials, It states that it is DoD policy to cooperate with civilian law enforcement offTcfafs, It also establishes procedures for local points of contact and coordination with federal, state and local officials to conduct investigations, procedures doe prompt transfer of relevant information to law enforcement agencies. I would think it is obvious, by the paperwork I have supplied to you, that NCIS agents, and attorneys it Michael Melocowsky, Major Plummer and Capt ils who work in the field not only ll , need updated training with the reporting requirements of the sexual assault of a child and how to conduct a proper investigation, but also find it excruciatingly difficult to be honest and impartial during and after an investigation. This is in ail NC1S documentation, with all the lies and inconsistencies contained within in them. Tell me, do you feel (after reading this) that these NCIS agents and defense/procesution did their job? I mean yes, they got a conviction, but did they do anything legal to obtain it? Your answer would have to be a resounding no, they did not. They have violated laws, DoD Directives, and executive orders to suit their own purpose. The fact that I am left with no other option but to "go public" with the information I have submitted should be seen as evidence your organization has failed to address the situation internally and that you are trying to gauge the seriousness of the situation by ignoring my complaints, I understand you feel that this situation does not merit your Investigation, but after reviewing the evidence I have showed (i.e. Petty Officer Skovrenko lying about taking child to hospital, NCIS not getting FAP involved, etc.), you are deliberately ignoring your legal and ethical obligation to address these complaints of wrong. I look forward to your prompt response regarding these allegations of agent misconduct and want to know the subsequent actions taken to rectify this matter before more serious actions are taken.




Certified Mail 770220000243075135