Find Post Investigations On:
Facebook Scribd Twitter
Friendfeed RSS Google Reader
» About This Blog | Meet the Investigative Team | Subscribe
Ongoing Investigation

Top Secret America

The Post explores the top secret world the government created in response to the attacks of Sept. 11.

Ongoing Investigation

The Hidden Life of Guns

How guns move through American society, from store counter to crime scene.

Have a Tip?

Talk to Us

If you have solid tips, news or documents on potential ethical violations or abuses of power, we want to know. Send us your suggestions.
• E-mail Us


Post Investigations
In-depth investigative news
and multimedia from The Washington Post.
• Special Reports
• The Blog

Reporters' Notebook
An insider's guide to investigative news: reporters offer insights on their stories.

The Daily Read
A daily look at investigative news of note across the Web.

Top Picks
A weekly review of the best
in-depth and investigative reports from across the nation.

Hot Documents
Court filings, letters, audits and other documents of interest.

D.C. Region
Post coverage of investigative news in Maryland, Virginia and the District.

Washington Watchdogs
A periodic look into official government investigations.

Help! What Is RSS?
Find out how to follow Post Investigations in your favorite RSS reader.

Hot Comments

Unfortunately I believe that we are limited in what we can focus on. I think that if we proceed with the partisan sideshow of prosecuting Bush admin. officials, healthcare will get lost in the brouhaha.
— Posted by denamom, Obama's Quandary...

Recent Posts
Bob Woodward

The Washington Post's permanent investigative unit was set up in 1982 under Bob Woodward.

See what you missed, find what you're looking for.
Blog Archive »
Investigations Archive »

Have a Tip?
Send us information on ethics violations or abuses of power.
E-Mail Us »

Notable investigative projects from other news outlets.
On the Web »
Top Picks »

Justice Says It Lacked Evidence to Charge Federal Oil Royalties Officials

POSTED: 05:05 PM ET, 10/22/2008 by Derek Kravitz

Government prosecutors say there was "insufficient evidence" to prosecute two former Interior Department officials implicated in a sex-and-gift scheme involving oil and gas marketers, adding that the inspector general's decision in protest to pull staffers off a task force investigating the Jack Abramoff lobbying case was an "extraordinary step."

Last month, the Interior Department's inspector general, Earl E. Devaney, told the House Natural Resources Committee that he was disappointed that two now-retired employees -- former oil royalty office chief Gregory W. Smith and former associate director Lucy Querques Denett -- were not prosecuted.

Investigators allege that Smith, 56, was among a group of more than a dozen employees who took gifts from clients; was involved in illicit sexual relationships with subordinates; purchased cocaine at his office; and arranged improper outside consulting deals that allowed him to earn more than $30,000.

The inspector general's reports also accused Denett, 55, of improperly arranging a million-dollar deal for two retired employees, both of whom have pleaded guilty to federal conflict-of-interest charges. Denett and Smith have declined to comment on the reports.

In a letter (PDF) to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), the attorney general's office said it lacked evidence in one case and "reviewed" the other case before deciding not to prosecute either Denett and Smith.

"Department prosecutors agreed with the DOl IG agents that there was insufficient evidence of criminal misconduct to support a prosecution with regard to one matter," wrote Keith B. Nelson, the principal deputy attorney general. "After consultation with the DOl IG, thorough investigation, and careful review by experienced career prosecutors in the Criminal Division's Public Integrity Section, we declined further action on some matters."

Conyers called the letter an "incomplete and entirely unsatisfactory response," adding that he was "shocked" it had been approved by the Justice Department.

"I can accept that not every request for information from Congress will be met with open arms at the Department of Justice," Conyers said (Conyer's original letter PDF and follow-up letter PDF). "But our system of checks and balances cannot function if Congressional requests are simply ignored or met with empty boilerplate that does not even explain why they are being denied."

In his response, Nelson also made note of the decision by the inspector general's office to pull people off the task force investigating the Abramoff case.

"The Department places a high priority on investigating and prosecuting public corruption and, consequently, we especially regret the DOl IG's decision to withdraw his support for an unrelated public corruption investigation," Nelson wrote. "We share your view that this was an extraordinary step, but it has not impeded our investigation."

Nelson also dismissed a McClatchy report that found senior Justice Department officials blocked the U.S. attorney in Colorado from supporting a whistleblower's suit last year regarding oil royalties as "misinformation." In his follow-up letter, Conyers asked that Nelson's accusation be clarified.

By Derek Kravitz |  October 22, 2008; 5:05 PM ET
Previous: Palin's Political Fashion Cents | Next: What the Stevens Jury is Mulling


Please email us to report offensive comments.

The link that supposedly goes to the DOJ letter goes to a Conyers letter.

Posted by: Visitor | October 22, 2008 10:43 PM

The links have been fixed.

Posted by: The Editors | October 22, 2008 11:32 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge'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.

characters remaining


© 2010 The Washington Post Company