The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

44 The Obama Presidency

Improper computer use by park official not germane to probe, Interior IG says

By Kimberly Kindy
A public report from a year-long investigation of the superintendent of Gettyburg National Military Park omitted that he viewed sexually-explicit images on his government computer because the information would have delayed the report's release and eclipsed its other findings, the Interior Department's inspector general said.

National Park Service employee John A. Latschar was reassigned to an unspecified desk job Friday, days after The Washington Post reported on an Aug. 7 memo about the images on his computer hard drive. Investigators came across the images while looking into 17 complaints accusing Latschar of misconduct and criminal activity.

The investigation found no criminal violations, according to the Sept. 17 public report. Although that report did not mention inappropriate computer use, the internal memo from August shows that Latschar signed a sworn statement acknowledging the misconduct.

In a statement provided to The Post Saturday, Mary L. Kendall, acting inspector general for Interior, wrote that Latschar's computer use was neither "timely nor germane to the allegations under investigation." The computer activity dated from 2004 to 2006.

"The findings were provided to the Department for whatever action was deemed appropriate... Furthermore, as recent press coverage of these findings has borne out, they would also have likely eclipsed the substantive findings into the 17 allegations that the OIG originally set out to investigate thoroughly and report on objectively," she wrote.

Posted at 11:31 PM ET on Oct 24, 2009  | Category:  44 The Obama Presidency
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Public Option Annie, the musical health-care protest | Next: Afghan challenger not interested in joining Karzai


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Cover-up for the upper management.

he should be fired and stripped of his retirement ( not all , just the last 5 or however many years he's been smutting around on the computer).

y

Posted by: tru-indy | October 25, 2009 2:07 PM

Such inappropriate use of the computer would likely have gotten a lower-level employee fired. I know of two instances where District government employees were fired for the same misconduct.

Posted by: esch | October 25, 2009 11:19 AM

I fail to see what this "article" has to do with the Obama presidency.

Posted by: dfeltus1 | October 25, 2009 10:49 AM

Mary Kendall said,

"The findings were provided to the Department for whatever action was deemed appropriate... Furthermore, as recent press coverage of these findings has borne out, they would also have likely eclipsed the substantive findings into the 17 allegations that the OIG originally set out to investigate thoroughly and report on objectively,"

Guess she was right since WaPo doesn't mention any of the 17 allegations.

Lame.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | October 25, 2009 1:13 AM
------
JohnQuimby, there's nothing "lame" here. The Washington Post has reported several times on this story and has covered the other allegations in the earlier articles. This article is about "news" meaning a new development in a long-running saga. Your complaint is like saying every single Watergate story should have recapped the entire scandal, or every Afghanistan war story should recap the history of Afghanistan including the last eight years. That's not how news works.

By the way, how do I know the Post has covered this particular story in the past, and how do I know what the more serious financial accusations were? I never heard of this story before today but when I looked at today's story I simply clicked on the links supplied in it to the earlier coverage. That's what those links are there for. My curiosity was satisfied by the earlier reporting at the click of a button, while those who've been following along got this short update without a lot of "filler" recapping old news.

Posted by: fairfaxvoter | October 25, 2009 9:10 AM

I found this report in nationnalparktraveler
and it's pretty interesting to read. I had no idea how much authority/decision making this educated man had. Me thinks perhaps he was in the job too long and just got bored...

I hope this link to the report works:

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/files/OIA-Latschar.pdf

Posted by: avahome | October 25, 2009 8:53 AM

Mary Kendall said,

"The findings were provided to the Department for whatever action was deemed appropriate... Furthermore, as recent press coverage of these findings has borne out, they would also have likely eclipsed the substantive findings into the 17 allegations that the OIG originally set out to investigate thoroughly and report on objectively,"

Guess she was right since WaPo doesn't mention any of the 17 allegations.

Lame.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | October 25, 2009 1:13 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.



 
 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company