DOJ RELEASES GUIDE TO REFORM HIV-SPECIFIC CRIMINAL LAWS TO ALIGN WITH SCIENCE

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Justice Department Releases Best Practices Guide to Reform HIV-Specific Criminal Laws to Align with Scientifically-Supported Factors

The Justice Department announced today that it has released a Best Practices Guide to Reform HIV-Specific Criminal Laws to Align with Scientifically-Supported Factors .  This guide provides technical assistance regarding state laws that criminalize engaging in certain behaviors without disclosing known HIV-positive status.   The guide will assist states to ensure that their policies reflect contemporary understanding of HIV transmission routes and associated benefits of treatment and do not place unnecessary burdens on individuals living with HIV/AIDS.

This guide is in follow-up to the department’s March 15, 2014, article published with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Prevalence and Public Health Implications of State Laws that Criminalize Potential HIV Exposure in the United States, which examined HIV-specific criminal laws.  Generally, these laws do not account for scientifically-supported level of risk by type of activities engaged in or risk reduction measures undertaken.  As a result, many of these state laws criminalize behaviors that the CDC regards as posing either no risk or negligible risk for HIV transmission even in the absence of risk reduction measures.

“While initially well intentioned, these laws often run counter to current scientific evidence about routes of HIV transmission, and may run counter to our best public health practices for prevention and treatment of HIV,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels for the Civil Rights Division.  “The department is committed to using all of the tools available to address the stigma that acts as a barrier to effectively addressing this epidemic.”

The department’s efforts to provide guidance on HIV-specific criminal laws are part of its ongoing commitment to implementation of the National HIV/AID Strategy, released in 2010.  Today’s guide furthers the expectation from the Office of National AIDS Policy that we tackle misconceptions, stigma and discrimination to break down barriers to care for those people living with HIV in response to the President’s Executive Order last year on the HIV Care Continuum Initiative.

FTC, DOJ ANTITRUST STATEMENT ON SHARING CYBERSECURITY INFORMATION

FROM:  FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

FTC, DOJ Issue Antitrust Policy Statement on Sharing Cybersecurity Information

Sharing Cyber Threat Information Can Help Secure Nation’s Networks and Improve Efficiency; Properly Designed Sharing Not Likely to Raise Antitrust Concerns
The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice today issued a policy statement on the sharing of cyber-security information that makes clear that properly designed cyber threat information sharing is not likely to raise antitrust concerns and can help secure the nation’s networks of information and resources. The policy statement provides the agencies’ analytical framework for information sharing among private entities and is designed to reduce uncertainty for those who want to share ways to prevent and combat cyberattacks.

“Because of the FTC’s long experience promoting data security, we understand the serious threat posed by cyberattacks,” said FTC Chairwoman Ramirez. “This statement should help private businesses by making it clear that antitrust laws do not stand in the way of legitimate sharing of cybersecurity threat information.”

“The Department of Justice is committed to doing all it can to protect the security of our nation’s networks.  Through the FBI and the National Security and Criminal Divisions, the department plays a critical role in preventing and prosecuting cybercrime,” said Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole.  “Private parties play a critical role in mitigating and responding to cyber threats, and this policy statement should encourage them to share cybersecurity information.”

“Cyber threats are increasing in number and sophistication, and sharing information about these threats, such as incident reports, indicators and threat signatures, is something companies can do to protect their information systems and help secure our nation’s infrastructure,” said Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer in charge of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division. “With proper safeguards in place, cyber threat information sharing can occur without posing competitive concerns.”

In the policy statement, the federal antitrust agencies recognize that the sharing of cyber threat information has the potential to improve the security, availability, integrity and efficiency of the nation’s information systems. The policy statement also emphasizes that the legitimate sharing of cyber threat information is very different from the sharing of competitively sensitive information such as current or future prices and output or business plans, which may raise antitrust concerns. Cyber threat information is typically technical in nature and covers a limited type of information, and disseminating that information appears unlikely to raise competitive concerns.

The joint Department of Justice/Federal Trade Commission “Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors” provide an overview of the agencies’ analysis of information sharing as a general matter. The agencies consider whether the relevant agreement likely harms competition by increasing the ability or incentive to raise price above or reduce output, quality, service or innovation below what likely would prevail in the absence of the relevant agreement.

Previous antitrust analysis on cyber threat information sharing was issued in October 2000, when the Antitrust Division issued specific guidance in a business review letter to Electric Power Research Institute Inc. Under the Justice Department’s business review procedure, an organization may submit a proposed action to the Antitrust Division and receive a statement as to whether the division will challenge the action under the antitrust laws. In that letter, the Antitrust Division confirmed that it had no intention of taking enforcement action against the company’s proposal to exchange certain cyber-security information, including exchanging actual real-time cyber threat and attack information. In that matter, the division concluded that as long as the information exchanged was limited to physical and cyber-security issues, the proposed interdictions on price, purchasing and future product innovation discussions should be sufficient to avoid any threats to competition. The legal analysis in that matter remains current.

HHS ANNOUNCES RECORD $19.5 BILLION RECOVERED FROM HEALTH CARE FRAUD CASES

FROM:  DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
February 26, 2014

Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services announce record-breaking recoveries resulting from joint efforts to combat health care fraud
Government teams recovered $4.3 billion in FY 2013 and $19.2 billion over the last five years

Attorney General Eric Holder and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today released the annual Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control (HCFAC) Program report showing that for every dollar spent on health care-related fraud and abuse investigations through this and other programs in the last three years, the government recovered $8.10.  This is the highest three-year average return on investment in the 17-year history of the HCFAC Program.

The government’s health care fraud prevention and enforcement efforts recovered a record-breaking $4.3 billion in taxpayer dollars in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, up from $4.2 billion in FY 2012, from individuals and companies who attempted to defraud federal health programs serving seniors or who sought payments from taxpayers to which they were not entitled.  Over the last five years, the administration’s enforcement efforts have recovered $19.2 billion, up from $9.4 billion over the prior five-year period.  Since the inception of the program in1997, the HCFAC Program has returned more than $25.9 billion to the Medicare Trust Funds and treasury.

These recoveries, released today in the annual HCFAC Program report, demonstrate President Obama’s commitment to making the elimination of fraud, waste and abuse, particularly in health care, a top priority for the administration.  This is the fifth consecutive year that the program has increased recoveries over the past year, climbing from $2 billion in FY 2008 to over $4 billion every year since FY 2011.

The success of this joint Department of Justice and HHS effort was made possible in part by the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), created in 2009 to prevent fraud, waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid and to crack down on individuals and entities that are abusing the system and costing American taxpayers billions of dollars.

“With these extraordinary recoveries, and the record-high rate of return on investment we’ve achieved on our comprehensive health care fraud enforcement efforts, we’re sending a strong message to those who would take advantage of their fellow citizens, target vulnerable populations, and commit fraud on federal health care programs,” said Attorney General Eric Holder.  “Thanks to initiatives like HEAT, our work to combat fraud has never been more cooperative or more effective.  And our unprecedented commitment to holding criminals accountable, and securing remarkable results for American taxpayers, is paying dividends.”

“These impressive recoveries for the American taxpayer are just one aspect of the comprehensive anti-fraud strategy we have implemented since the passage of the Affordable Care Act,” said HHS Secretary Sebelius.  “We’ve cracked down on tens of thousands health care providers suspected of Medicare fraud. New enrollment screening techniques are proving effective in preventing high risk providers from getting into the system, and the new computer analytics system that detects and stops fraudulent billing before money ever goes out the door is accomplishing positive results – all of which are adding to savings for the Medicare Trust Fund.”

The new authorities under the Affordable Care Act granted to HHS and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) were instrumental in clamping down on fraudulent activity in health care.  In FY 2013, CMS announced the first use of its temporary moratoria authority granted by the Affordable Care Act.  The action stopped enrollment of new home health or ambulance enrollments in three fraud hot spots around the country, allowing CMS and its law enforcement partners to remove bad actors from the program while blocking provider entry or re-entry into these already over-supplied markets.

The Justice Department and HHS have improved their coordination through HEAT and are currently operating Medicare Fraud Strike Force teams in nine areas across the country. The strike force teams use advanced data analysis techniques to identify high-billing levels in health care fraud hot spots so that interagency teams can target emerging or migrating schemes as well as chronic fraud by criminals masquerading as health care providers or suppliers. The Justice Department’s enforcement of the civil False Claims Act and the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act has produced similar record-breaking results.  These combined efforts coordinated under HEAT have expanded local partnerships and helped educate Medicare beneficiaries about how to protect themselves against fraud.

In Fiscal Year 2013, the strike force secured records in the number of cases filed (137), individuals charged (345), guilty pleas secured (234) and jury trial convictions (46). Beyond these remarkable results, the defendants who were charged and sentenced are facing significant time in prison – an average of 52 months in prison for those sentenced in FY 2013, and an average of 47 months in prison for those sentenced since 2007.

In FY 2013, the Justice Department opened 1,013 new criminal health care fraud investigations involving 1,910 potential defendants, and a total of 718 defendants were convicted of health care fraud-related crimes during the year.  The department also opened 1,083 new civil health care fraud investigations.

The strike force coordinated a takedown in May 2013 that resulted in charges by eight strike force cities against 89 individuals, including doctors, nurses and other licensed medical professionals, for their alleged participation in Medicare fraud schemes involving approximately $223 million in false billings. As a part of the May 2013 takedown, HHS also suspended or took other administrative action against 18 providers using authority under the health care law to suspend payments until an investigation is complete.

In FY 2013, the strike force secured records in the number of cases filed (137), individuals charged (345), guilty pleas secured (234) and jury trial convictions (48). Beyond these remarkable results, the defendants who were charged and sentenced are facing significant time in prison – an average of 52 months in prison for those sentenced in FY 2013, and an average of 47 months in prison for those sentenced since 2007.

In March 2011, CMS began an ambitious project to revalidate all 1.5 million Medicare enrolled providers and suppliers under the Affordable Care Act screening requirements. As of September 2013, more than 535,000 providers were subject to the new screening requirements and over 225,000 lost the ability to bill Medicare due to the Affordable Care Act requirements and other proactive initiatives.  Since the Affordable Care Act, CMS has also revoked 14,663 providers and suppliers’ ability to bill the Medicare program. These providers were removed from the program because they had felony convictions, were not operational at the address CMS had on file, or were not in compliance with CMS rules.

HHS and the Justice Department are leading historic efforts with the private sector to bring innovation to the fight against health care fraud. In addition to real-time data and information exchanges with the private sector, CMS’ Program Integrity Command Center worked with the HHS Office of the Inspector General and the FBI to conduct 93 missions to detect, investigate, and reduce improper payments in FY 2013.

From May 2013 through August 2013, CMS led an outreach and education campaign targeted to specific communities where Medicare fraud is more prevalent.  This multimedia campaign included national television, radio, and print outreach and resulted in an increased awareness of how to detect and report Medicare fraud.

4 FISHERMEN INDICTED FOR INTERSTATE SALE OF STRIPED BASS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Thursday, November 21, 2013

Four Commercial Fishermen Indicted in Maryland for Illegal Harvest and Interstate Sale of Striped Bass from Chesapeake Bay

One Charged with Threatening Retaliation and Witnesses Tampering During Investigation

Four commercial fishermen and one company were indicted yesterday by a federal grand jury in Baltimore for a criminal conspiracy involving the illegal harvesting and interstate sale of striped bass on the Chesapeake Bay, announced Robert G. Dreher, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, and Rod J. Rosenstein, U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland.

According to court documents, Michael D. Hayden Jr., his company, William J. Lednum, Kent Sadler and Daniel Murphy engaged in a multi-year conspiracy during which time they harvested tens of thousands of pounds of striped bass on the Chesapeake Bay in violation of Maryland fishing regulations, falsified documents filed with the State of Maryland, and then transported and sold those poached fish in interstate commerce.   In addition, after the investigation of these crimes began, it is alleged that Hayden attempted to manipulate some witnesses’ testimony while trying to outright prevent the testimony and cooperation of others.   In addition, it is alleged that in at least one incident, Hayden threatened to retaliate against another potential witness he believed to be cooperating with investigators.   Hayden was arrested on Sept. 17, 2013, having been charged in a criminal complaint with several counts of witness intimidation and retaliation.

The 26-count indictment charges the defendants with conspiracy, and Lacey Act violations.    These charges carry possible terms of incarceration of five years.   In addition, the witness intimidation/retaliation charges against Mr. Hayden each carry a maximum-term of 20 years in prison.

An indictment is a charging document and all defendants are innocent until proven guilty.

This case is being investigated by criminal investigators with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Natural Resources Police and Special Agents from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.   The case is being jointly prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland and the Environmental Crimes Section of the United States Department of Justice.

AG HOLDER'S REMARKS AT MEETING OF MINISTERS RESPONSIBLE FOR PUBLIC SECURITY IN AMERICAS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Attorney General Eric Holder Delivers Remarks at the Fourth Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Public Security in the Americas
Medillin, Colombia ~ Thursday, November 21, 2013

Thank you, Associate Deputy Minister [John] Ossowski.  I appreciate your kind words – and I thank you for serving as moderator for today’s first session.  I would also like to thank the Government of Colombia for hosting this important gathering of friends, colleagues, and leaders.  And I applaud the Organization of American States for having the vision to focus on regional cooperation as an effective conduit for increasing public safety – and reinforcing our mutual security.

 It’s an honor to bring greetings from President [Barack] Obama.  And it’s a pleasure to be in this beautiful city today.
 As Minister Pinzon suggested this morning, there could be no more powerful symbol than that we are holding our OAS meeting today in Medellin – a city that has been transformed. And I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to the courage of the Colombian judges, prosecutors, police officers and citizens who made this transformation possible – sometimes at the cost of their lives. Their courage is an inspiration to us today.

 Indeed, each of our nations has displayed a shared commitment – and dedication – to building on the progress that our respective countries have made possible in recent years, particularly when it comes to protecting our citizens from violence and harm and combating transnational organized crime.  And I appreciate the chance to discuss this commitment with you today.

 As the title of this session suggests, the cornerstone of any effective law enforcement strategy rests upon the notion that our actions must be undertaken in concert with others – whether within individual neighborhoods, states, countries, or continents.  We must cooperate if we are to protect our respective citizens from the criminal enterprises that threaten our national and international interests.  And we must acknowledge that none among us can fight this battle on our own, or by implementing a “one-size-fits all” approach.  On the contrary: we must take advantage of opportunities like this one to review and analyze cutting-edge strategies that can work for all of us, while at the same time seeking ways to adapt, to fine-tune, and to closely tailor our individual crime-fighting modalities to the specific security threats our people face.

      In the United States, shifting crime trends over the last four decades have made it abundantly clear that new strategies must be brought to bear.  It’s become self-evident that 20th-century solutions are simply not adequate to address the 21st-century challenges we face.  And that’s why my colleagues and I have undertaken a series of fundamental policy changes – within the American criminal justice system, at the federal level – to invest in innovative models for reform; to explore new ways to ensure public safety and bring about just outcomes; to target precious law enforcement resources to the areas where they’re most needed; and to become smarter as well as tougher on crime.  I hope that what we’ve chosen to do at the Justice  Department will prove of value to you.  And I look forward to your feedback, as well as the chance to learn how your countries have dealt with some of the same issues.

 The approach we have undertaken in the United States requires policymakers and law enforcement leaders to be frank about which policies have proven effective – and which have not.  It demands that we embrace data-driven solutions, reject the tired assumptions of the past, and consider crime in its appropriate context – not just by reacting to criminal acts themselves, but by improving the government’s ability to enhance public safety through proactive policing – and empowering those who are released from prison to rejoin their communities in a productive and meaningful way.

 As President Obama and I have discussed many times over the years – and as I have repeatedly made clear – the path we are currently on is far from sustainable.  As we speak, roughly one out of every 100 American adults is behind bars.  Although the United States comprises just five percent of the world’s population, we incarcerate almost a quarter of the world’s prisoners.  While few would dispute the fact that incarceration has a role to play in any comprehensive public safety strategy, it’s become evident that such widespread incarceration is both inadvisable and unsustainable.  It requires that we routinely spend billions of dollars on prison construction – and tens of billions more, on an annual basis, to house those who are convicted of crimes.  It carries both human and moral costs that are too much to bear.  And it results in far too many Americans serving too much time in too many prisons – and beyond the point of serving any good law enforcement reason.

 Clearly, it is time – in fact, it’s well past time – that federal leaders consider a fundamentally new approach.  As a prosecutor, a former judge, an attorney in private practice – and now as my nation’s top law enforcement official – I’ve seen the federal criminal justice system firsthand, from nearly every angle.  And although I have the utmost faith – and confidence – in America’s legal system, and especially in the dedicated men and women who serve it, I also recognize that we can and must do much better.
 This is why, early this year – at my direction – the Department of Justice launched a targeted review of the federal criminal justice system in order to identify reforms that will enable us to better protect the American people from crime; to increase support for those who become crime victims; and to bolster public safety by improving the criminal justice system as a whole.  In August, I announced the results of this review – which include a series of significant actions that the Department of Justice has undertaken to ensure just outcomes, to promote fair law enforcement, to improve diversion and reentry policies, and to strengthen protections for the most vulnerable members of our society.

 These reforms – which are currently being implemented across the United States – will help to bring our criminal justice system in line with our most treasured values: of equality, opportunity, and justice under law.  Particularly in this time of growing demands and limited budgets, they also will help our federal system operate more efficiently by improving coordination between agencies at every level.

 These efforts must begin with law enforcement.  That’s why I issued guidance to ensure that every case brought by federal authorities serves a substantial federal interest – and complements the work of our law enforcement counterparts at the state, local, and tribal levels.  I have also directed our United States Attorneys, who lead federal prosecutions across the country, to develop specific, locally-tailored guidelines for determining when charges should be filed, and when they should not.  This will enable us to focus our efforts on the most serious cases – those that implicate clear and substantial public security threats, including national security, protecting Americans from violent crime and financial fraud, and safeguarding our most vulnerable citizens.

 In addition, I took action this summer to bring about a significant change in the Justice Department’s charging policies with regard to mandatory minimum sentences for drug related crimes – so that certain people who have committed low-level, nonviolent drug offenses, and who have no ties to large-scale organizations, gangs, or cartels – will no longer be charged with offenses that impose draconian mandatory minimum sentences.  Instead, they will be charged with offenses for which the accompanying sentences are more appropriate for their specific conduct, reserving the most severe penalties for violent criminals or drug kingpins.

 This shift will enable the Justice Department to better promote public safety, deterrence, and rehabilitation, while making our expenditures smarter and more productive.  As it stands, roughly 219,000 federal inmates are currently behind bars in the United States.  Almost half of them are serving time for drug-related crimes, and many have substance abuse problems.  Statistics show that many are likely to reoffend after they are released from prison – cycling through our federal and state criminal justice systems at great cost to American taxpayers – and without real benefit to public safety.

 This vicious cycle – of poverty, criminality, and incarceration – traps too many Americans and weakens too many communities.  And many aspects of our criminal justice system may actually exacerbate these problems, rather than alleviate them.  This is why the Justice Department is also placing a renewed emphasis on the use of what we refer to as diversion programs – such as drug courts, treatment programs for those who have committed low-level drug crimes, and dual-track programs that differentiate between those with a low risk of recidivism and those with more serious criminal histories.  By examining cases individually, identifying effective alternatives to incarceration under certain circumstances, and providing the resources necessary for those currently in the criminal justice system – and those who are released from prison – to become productive, law-abiding members of society, we can break this cycle.  And we can improve public safety, forge safer neighborhoods, begin to address the root causes of criminality – and make smarter decisions on how to prevent it.

 With these goals in mind, I have directed federal prosecutors around the country to designate prevention and reentry coordinators within each U.S. Attorney’s office – so we can ensure that these efforts are prioritized in every district.  The Justice Department is taking steps to highlight promising initiatives – many pioneered by individual states – that can serve as models for success, allowing policymakers to direct funding away from prison construction and toward strategies that are proven to reduce recidivism and improve public safety.  And my colleagues and I are moving in a variety of ways to identify and share best practices on reentry programs focused on specific needs related to employment, housing, and family support, among other key priorities.

 Ultimately, however, this comprehensive “Smart on Crime” approach is about far more than fairness for those who are released from prisons.  It makes plain economic sense.  And it is a matter of both public safety and public good.  While my colleagues and I recognize that the aggressive enforcement of federal criminal statutes will always be necessary, the reality is that we will never prosecute or incarcerate our way to becoming a safer nation.  No country can succeed with such an approach.  Instead, we must focus on prevention and reentry.  We must be smart as well as efficient when battling criminal acts – and the conditions, and individual choices, that breed them.  Most importantly, we must embrace reforms and innovations that can bring our law enforcement policies and practices in line with the values we share with all of the nations represented here – and which all of you have been working hard to translate into principled action, especially in recent years.

 Each of the leaders in this room has the privilege of serving his or her respective country – and its citizens – in a time of common challenges and uncommon threats, when our ability to ensure peace, security, and justice depends more than ever on our willingness to work together – meeting national challenges with regional, and even global, solutions.  There’s no question – as we come together today – that we have an unprecedented opportunity to share critical information, instructive experiences, and best practices.  And that’s why I firmly believe that each of us must resolve – here and now – to seize this chance to collaborate, and to work together, in order to make our communities and our nations not only safer, but stronger.

 Together, we can grow smarter on crime by implementing reforms and enacting legislation that ensures fairness in sentencing; by focusing scarce resources on incarcerating only those who pose the greatest threats; and by providing safe and productive paths forward for those who have paid their debts to society.  We can grow smarter on crime by directing assistance and resources to “hot spots” of criminality; by recognizing that vulnerable populations deserve extra care and protection; and by acting on the realization that we are uniquely positioned – and empowered – to make the positive difference that our citizens need and deserve.

 On behalf of President Obama – and the Department of Justice I am privileged to lead – let me say, once again, how pleased and honored I am to stand with you, and to work with you, to improve the safety and security of our fellow citizens.  Despite the obstacles that undoubtedly lie ahead, as I look around this room, I cannot help but feel confident in our collective ability to do just that.  I look forward to all that we will accomplish in the months and years ahead.  And I thank you, once again, for the opportunity to be here today.

DOJ ANNOUNCED ENHANCED ONLINE RESOURCES FOR U.S. VICTIMS OF OVERSEAS TERRORISM

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Justice Department Announces Enhanced Online Resource for U.S. Victims of Overseas Terrorism

The Justice Department today announced an enhanced online resource designed to support American victims of overseas terrorism.  The site, sponsored and maintained by the National Security Division’s Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism (OVT), will expand the public’s ability to obtain information about the types of support available to help victims of overseas attacks and their loved ones in the aftermath of acts of international terrorism, including information about programs available to assist victims in connection with foreign criminal justice proceedings.  In addition, the website provides greater information about OVT’s establishment and services, for victims and others interested in OVT’s work.

“This enhanced website will serve as an important resource for U.S. victims of overseas terrorism and their loved ones,” said John P. Carlin, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security. “The Department remains committed both to seeking justice for Americans victimized by terrorism, whether at home or abroad, and to providing victims the information and support they deserve.”

The Attorney General established the OVT on May 6, 2005.  It is now a component of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.  The primary purpose of the OVT is to ensure that the investigation and prosecution of terrorist attacks against American citizens overseas remain a high priority within the Department of Justice.

The OVT is responsible for monitoring the investigation and prosecution of terrorist attacks against Americans abroad; working with other pertinent Justice Department components to ensure that the rights of victims of such attacks are honored and respected; establishing a Joint Task Force with the Department of State, to be activated in the event of a terrorist attack  in which Americans are harmed; and serving as an information resource to American victims of overseas terrorism including, as appropriate, information about ongoing foreign investigations and prosecutions.

“It is crucially important that any Americans attacked while traveling or living outside of our borders receive the support of our government as they pursue justice in the aftermath of the tragedy of terrorism,” said Heather Cartwright, Director of the Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism.  “This online resource gathers in one place important information for American victims of overseas terrorism and provides assistance as they seek accountability for these crimes.”

HEALTH CARE COMPANY OWNERS SENTENCED FOR ROLES IN $17.1 MILLION FRAUD

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
 Thursday, August 15, 2013
Operators of Louisiana Home Health Company Sentenced for $17.1 Million Health Care Fraud Scheme

The owner of South Louisiana Home Health Care Inc. and the director of nursing for the Louisiana home health agency were sentenced today for their roles in a Medicare fraud scheme involving the payment of kickbacks and the falsification of documents.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Criminal Division; Acting U.S. Attorney Walt Green of the Middle District of Louisiana; Special Agent in Charge Mike Fields of the Dallas Region of the HHS Office of the Inspector General (HHS-OIG); Special Agent in Charge Michael Anderson of the FBI’s New Orleans Division; and Louisiana State Attorney General James Buddy Caldwell made the announcement.

Louis T. Age Jr., 64, owned and operated South Louisiana Home Health Care and operated this company along with his former wife, Verna Age, 60, who served as the company’s director of nursing. Louis Age and Verna Age, both of Slidell, La., were sentenced today by U.S. District Judge James J. Brady of the Middle District of Louisiana to 180 months and 60 months in prison, respectively, and ordered to forfeit $9.2 million and pay $17.1 in restitution.

After a jury trial in March 2013, Louis Age and Verna Age each were convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud, and Louis Age also was convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and to pay or receive illegal health care kickbacks.  Verna Age previously was convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and to pay or receive illegal health care kickbacks after a jury trial in October 2012.

According to evidence presented at trial, Louis Age and Verna Age paid kickbacks to patient recruiters to obtain Medicare beneficiary information.  Nurses, including registered nurse Verna Age, then falsified qualification documents to make it appear that these beneficiaries qualified for home health services.  The evidence also showed that Louis Age hired and paid kickbacks to medical doctors to sign fraudulent referrals and certifications for home health services that were not medically necessary.  Louis Age and Verna Age then used the Medicare beneficiary information and false documents to bill Medicare for the medically unnecessary home health services.  From 2005 through 2011, Medicare paid South Louisiana Home Health Care approximately $17.1 million based on these fraudulent home health care claims.
 
This case was investigated by the FBI, HHS-OIG and Medicaid Fraud Control Unit of the Louisiana State Attorney General’s Office and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Louisiana. The case was prosecuted by Trial Attorneys David M. Maria and Abigail B. Taylor of the Fraud Section, with assistance from Trial Attorney Arunabha Bhoumik.

Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged more than 1,500 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for more than $5 billion.  In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, is taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.

DOJ REMARKS ON LAWSUIT CHALLENGING US AIRWAYS PROPOSED MERGER WITH AMERICAN AIRLINES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

REMARKS AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY BY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL BAER AT THE CONFERENCE CALL REGARDING THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S LAWSUIT CHALLENGING US AIRWAYS’ PROPOSED MERGER 
WITH AMERICAN AIRLINES WASHINGTON, D.C.

As you are aware, this morning, the Department of Justice, six state attorneys general plus the District of Columbia, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., to block the proposed merger of American Airlines and US Airways.

Those attorneys general participating in the lawsuit are: Texas, from American’s home state; Arizona, from US Airways’ home state; Pennsylvania, home to one of US Airways’ largest hubs; Florida; Tennessee; and Virginia and Washington, D.C. – where both airlines operate. We filed the lawsuit today because we determined that the merger – which would create the world’s largest airline and leave just three legacy carriers remaining in the U.S. – would substantially lessen competition for commercial air travel throughout the United States. Importantly, neither airline needs this merger to succeed. We simply cannot approve a merger that would result in U.S. consumers paying higher fares, higher fees and receiving less service. Americans spent more than $70 billion flying around the country last year. Increases in the price of airline tickets, checked bags or flight change fees resulting from this merger would result in hundreds of millions of dollars of harm to American consumers.

If this merger were to go forward, consumers will lose the benefit of head-to-head
competition between US Airways and American on thousands of airline routes across the country – in cities big and small. They will pay more for less service because the remaining three legacy carriers – United, Delta and the new American – will have very little incentive to compete on price. Indeed, as our complaint shows, the management of US Airways, which will run the new airline, sees consolidation as a vehicle to reduce competition between the airlines and raise fees and fares. Here is one powerful example. Today, US Airways competes vigorously by offering discounts of up to 40 percent if a consumer takes its one stop instead of another airline’s nonstop route. This means that if you need to catch a flight at the last minute for any reason –

celebration or emergency – you will find it is 40 percent cheaper to take US Airways’ connecting service than the non-stop fare offered by American, Delta and United. The big three airlines – American, Delta and United – don’t like this aggressive price cutting by US Airways. For example, for round-trip flights leaving on August 13 and returning on August 14 from Miami to Cincinnati, you can see the benefits of US Airways’ discount program. American is the only airline on this route to offer nonstop service, charging $740. Delta and United don’t have offer competition since they both charge more for their connecting service than American charges for nonstop service. In this instance, a consumer who bought a US Airways one-stop ticket would save $269 compared to American’s nonstop service. You can see the benefits of competition between US Airways and American on hundreds of other flights. For example, on round-trip flights leaving on August 13 and returning on August 14 from New York to Houston, US Airways’ one stop fare is about $870 cheaper than the other legacy carriers’ nonstop flights, and even beats JetBlue and AirTran by more than $300. Although Southwest doesn’t participate in the standard online travel sites, a cross-check against the Southwest website for the same dates demonstrates that US Airways also beats Southwest’s $887 nonstop fare by more than $300.  If this merger happens, US Airways’ aggressive discounting – called Advantage Fares –

will disappear. As a bigger airline with many more hubs, there will be no incentive for the merged company to offer any of the discounts I just described, resulting in higher prices, less choice and fewer services for the more than two million travelers who today benefit from the program. How do we know it? We know this from the internal analyses and the planning documents put together by American in considering the likely effects of this merger. The elimination of the Advantage Fares program is just one example. If the merger goes forward, consumers can also expect to pay higher fees for things like checked bags, flight changes, more legroom and frequent flyer benefits. Today, American does not charge if you redeem frequent flyer miles. US Airways charges an average of $40. If the merger is allowed, US Airways is planning to take this frequent flyer benefit away and make American’s frequent flyers pay redemption fees. By eliminating this competitive distinction between American and US Airways, the new airline generates an additional $120 million in revenue. But you pay the price. Consumers will also pay more on routes where US Airways and American today offer competing nonstop service. We know from prior mergers that elimination of head-to-head competition on nonstop routes results in substantial price increases for consumers.

Expect similar fare increases if this merger is allowed. For example, US Airways and American offer competing nonstop service between Charlotte, North Carolina and Dallas-Ft. Worth. Consumers will likely pay more than $3 million more per year for travel on that route alone.  You don’t need to go far from this very city to see another worrisome effect from the proposed merger. Across the Potomac River, the merged airline would dominate Washington Reagan National Airport, by controlling 69 percent of the take-off and landing slots at DCA. And, it would have a monopoly on 63 percent of the nonstop routes out of Reagan.

National. By allowing one airline to control that many slots, the merger will prevent other airlines, including low-fare carriers like JetBlue and Southwest from competing at Reagan National.  It would face little or NO competition.  Indeed, this would get worse. Recently JetBlue started service from Reagan National to Boston, competing with US Airways, and fares dropped by more than 30 percent saving consumers about $50 million a year. Similarly, consumers saved about $14 million in lower fares between Tampa and Reagan National after JetBlue started competing against US Airways. But – and this is important – half of JetBlue’s slots at Reagan National are leased from American. If this deal is allowed, new American can terminate that lease and JetBlue’s ability to compete will be severely diminished. Consumers will pay the price.

Blocking the merger will preserve current competition and service at Reagan National airport, including flights that US Airways currently offers to large and small communities around the country. The complaint also describes other ways in which consumers are at risk if we allow this deal to further reduce the number of competitors in this industry.

You do not need to take my word for this. High level executives at US Airways have talked about how consolidation allows for capacity reductions that “enable” fare increases. One US Airways executive recently stated that this merger is “the last major piece needed to fully rationalize the industry.” In the airline business the word “rationalize” is a code word for less competition, higher costs for consumers and fewer choices.

Both US Airways and American have publicly stated that they can do well without this merger. American has used the bankruptcy process to lower its costs and revitalize its fleet. It has repeatedly said that it can thrive as a standalone competitor. Just this January, American’s management presented plans that would increase the destinations and frequency of its flights in the U.S., allowing it to compete independently and vigorously with plans to grow.

And, executives of US Airways agree about American’s ability to make it on its own. They have noted that American will be stronger post-bankruptcy and that “[t]here is NO question” about American’s ability “to survive on a standalone basis.”

 US Airways also has said that US Airways itself does not need the merger – that it can thrive as a standalone firm.

The lawsuit we filed today to block this deal gives consumers the best possible chance for continued competition in an important industry that they have come to rely upon.
I want to thank the litigation team from the division’s Transportation, Energy and
Agriculture Section, led by Chief Bill Stallings and Assistant Chief Kathy O’Neill, as well as the Economic Analysis Group led by Bob Majure and Oliver Richard for their hard work on this.  And, I want to thank the attorneys general who have joined this lawsuit and are working with us to protect the consumers of their respective states.
And with that, I’m happy to take any questions you have.

FORMER FBI SPECIAL AGENT CHARGED WITH BRIBERY

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Friday, August 2, 2013
Former FBI Special Agent and Two Co-Conspirators Charged with Bribery Scheme

A former FBI agent and two others have been charged in the Southern District of New York with engaging in a bribery scheme to secure confidential, internal law enforcement documents about a prominent individual in Bangladesh.

Acting Assistant U.S. Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of the Southern District of New York, and Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz of the Department of Justice made the announcement.

 Robert Lustyik, 50, a former FBI special agent in the White Plains Resident Agency, is accused in a criminal complaint of conspiring with his friend, Johannes Thaler, 49, of soliciting cash payments from Thaler’s acquaintance, Rizve Ahmed, 34, aka “Caesar,” in exchange for confidential, internal law enforcement documents and information that Lustyik could access by virtue of his position at the FBI.  Ahmed and Thaler were arrested today on the charges in the complaint and will be presented later today before U.S. Magistrate Judge George A. Yanthis in the federal court in White Plains.  Lustyik is currently detained in connection with an unrelated indictment in U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, where he will be initially presented on the charges in the complaint.

Lustyik, Thaler, and Ahmed are each charged in a four-count complaint. Count one charges Lustyik, Thaler, and Ahmed with conspiring to bribe a public official.  Count two charges Lustyik and Thaler with soliciting and receiving bribes.  Count three charges Ahmed with bribing a public official and offering to bribe a public official.  Count four charges Lustyik with unlawfully disclosing a Suspicious Activity Report.

If convicted, Lustyik, of Westchester County, faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. Thaler, of Fairfield County, Conn., faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. Ahmed, of Fairfield County, faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

According to allegations in the complaint unsealed today in the White Plains federal courthouse, from about September 2011 through March 2012, Lustyik, Thaler and Ahmed engaged in a bribery scheme on behalf of Ahmed, a native of Bangladesh who sought confidential law enforcement information pertaining to a prominent citizen of Bangladesh who was affiliated with an opposing political party (Individual 1).  Ahmed sought, among other things, to obtain information about Individual 1, to locate Individual 1, and to harm Individual 1 and others associated with Individual 1.

As part of the scheme, Lustyik and Thaler exchanged text messages, including messages about how to pressure Ahmed to pay them additional money in exchange for confidential information.  For example, in text messages, Lustyik told Thaler, “we need to push [Ahmed] for this meeting and get that 40 gs quick . . . . I will talk us into getting the cash . . . . I will work my magic . . . . We r sooooooo close.”  Thaler responded, “I know.  It’s all right there in front of us.  Pretty soon we’ll be having lunch in our oceanfront restaurant . . . .”  As another example, in or about late January 2012, Lustyik, upon learning that Ahmed was considering using a different source to obtain confidential information about Individual 1, texted Thaler, “I want to kill [Ahmed] . . . . I hung my [***] out the window n we got nothing? . . . . Tell [Ahmed], I’ve got [Individual 1’s] number and I’m pissed. . . . I will put a wire on n get [Ahmed and his associates] to admit they want [a Bangladeshi political figure] offed n we sell it to [Individual 1].”

According to the complaint, Lustyik and Thaler accepted at least $1,000 from Ahmed in exchange for confidential FBI information, including a Suspicious Activity Report.  The complaint also alleges that Lustyik and Thaler schemed to obtain monthly cash bribes from Ahmed, in increments of tens of thousands of dollars, in exchange for the provision of additional confidential law enforcement information about Individual 1 and for assistance in having criminal charges against a Bangladeshi political figure dismissed.

This case was investigated by the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General. The prosecution is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York’s White Plains Division and by the Public Integrity Section of the U.S. Department of Justice’ Criminal Division. Assistant U. S. Attorney Benjamin Allee and Trial Attorney Emily Rae Woods are in charge of the prosecution.

The charges in the complaint are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.

TWO SENTENCED FOR DUMPING TONS OF ASBESTOS IN VIOLATION OF CLEAN WATER ACT

FROM:   U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
Friday, August 2, 2013
Two Sentenced in New York State for Dumping Thousands of Tons of Asbestos in Violation of the Clean Water Act

Two individuals, Donald Torriero and Julius DeSimone, were sentenced in federal court in Utica, N.Y., for illegally dumping thousands of tons of asbestos-contaminated construction debris on a 28-acre piece of property on the Mohawk River in upstate New York, the Justice Department announced.

U.S. District Judge David N. Hurd sentenced Torriero to serve 36 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release. Torriero was immediately remanded into custody of the U.S. Marshals. DeSimone was sentenced to five years’ probation, including six months of home confinement. Both were ordered to pay $492,000 in restitution for, among other things, cleanup expenses at the site.

The two pleaded guilty to conspiring to violate the Clean Water Act, the Superfund statute, wire fraud and to defrauding the United States. In addition, Torriero pleaded guilty to substantive wire fraud charges, and DeSimone was convicted of making false statements to law enforcement in connection with a fabricated "permit letter" the conspirators created and used to dump at the site.

According to the evidence, Torriero, DeSimone and others conspired to fill in the entire property over the course of five years with pulverized construction and demolition debris that was processed at New Jersey solid waste management facilities and then transported to open property in Frankfort, N.Y.  The plot was uncovered by law enforcement just months after the operation began, but not before the conspirators had already dumped at least 400 truckloads of debris at the site. Much of the material that was dumped was placed in and around waters of the United States and some of the material was found to be contaminated with asbestos. The conspirators then concealed the illegal dumping and recruited others to join in the illegal dumping by fabricating a New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) permit and forged the name of a DEC official on the fraudulent permit.

“Torriero and DeSimone endangered the health of both their fellow citizens and sensitive wetlands by violating numerous laws meant to ensure the proper disposal of toxic materials. They also committed other criminal acts in their attempts to cover up their misdeeds,” stated Acting Assistant Attorney General Robert Dreher of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Holding these men responsible for their criminal activities will serve as notice to others involved in similar schemes that the Justice Department will not tolerate such flagrant disregard for the law and the environment.”

“Asbestos can cause cancer and other serious respiratory diseases; there is no safe level of exposure to it,” said Vernesa Jones-Allen, Acting Special Agent in Charge of EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division in New York. “The defendants in this case conspired to illegally dispose asbestos containing material. This case demonstrates that the American people will not tolerate those who make money by breaking the law and damage the environment.”

“This case demonstrates the commitment of local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to work together to protect the environment and the health of the citizens we serve,” said Richard S. Hartunian, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York. “I commend all the law enforcement officers involved in this case for their hard work in bringing Torriero and DeSimone to justice.”

“The disposal of hazardous materials is closely regulated in New York State to protect public health and our environment,” said New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Commissioner Joe Martens. “The forgery of permits by the defendants in this case was a blatant and potentially dangerous criminal act that undermined the integrity of the permit system. I applaud the collaborative work of DEC investigators and partners to halt this illegal dumping, apprehend the perpetrators, and bring them to justice.”

This case is related to the guilty pleas and sentencings associated with Eagle Recycling, Mazza & Sons Inc., Dominick Mazza, Cross Nicastro and Jon Deck. Mr. Deck is the last remaining individual awaiting sentencing.

This case was investigated by the New York State Environmental Conservation Police, Bureau of Environmental Crimes, EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division, Internal Revenue Service, New Jersey State Police Office of Business Integrity Unit, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and Ohio Department of Environmental Protection. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Craig A. Benedict of the Northern District of New York, and Trial Attorneys Todd W. Gleason and Gary Donner of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

FORMER SENIOR EXECUTIVE PLEADS GUILTY IN $400 MILLION SECURITIES FRAUD CASE

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Former Senior Executive of ArthroCare Corp. Pleads Guilty in $400 Million Securities Fraud Scheme

A former senior executive of ArthroCare Corp., a publicly traded medical device company based in Austin, Texas, pleaded guilty for his role in a scheme to defraud the company’s shareholders and members of the investing public by falsely inflating ArthroCare’s earnings, announced Acting Assistant Attorney Mythili Raman of the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Robert Pitman of the Western District of Texas. The plea was taken under seal on June 24, 2013, and unsealed late yesterday.

John Raffle, 45, of Austin, pleaded guilty before U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Lane in Austin to conspiracy to commit securities, mail and wire fraud and two false statements violations.  Raffle was the senior vice president of Strategic Business Units at ArthroCare, overseeing all sales and marketing staff at the company.  Raffle admitted that he and other co-conspirators falsely inflated ArthroCare’s sales and revenue through a series of end-of-quarter transactions involving ArthroCare’s distributors and that he and other co-conspirators caused ArthroCare to file a Form 10-K for 2007 and Form 10-Q for the first quarter of 2008 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that materially misrepresented ArthroCare’s quarterly and annual sales, revenues, expenses and earnings.  As part of his plea, Raffle agreed that his conduct and the conduct of his co-conspirators caused more than $400 million in losses to shareholders.

According to court documents, Raffle and others determined the type and amount of product to be shipped to distributors – notably ArthroCare’s largest distributor, DiscoCare Inc. –  based on ArthroCare’s need to meet sales forecasts, rather than the distributors’ actual orders. Raffle and others then caused ArthroCare to “park” millions of dollars worth of ArthroCare’s medical devices at its distributors at the end of each relevant quarter. ArthroCare would then report these shipments as sales in its quarterly and annual filings at the time of the shipment, enabling the company to meet or exceed internal and external earnings forecasts.

According to the superseding information, DiscoCare agreed to accept shipment of approximately $37 million of product in exchange for substantial, upfront cash commissions, extended payment terms and the ability to return product, as well as other special conditions, allowing ArthroCare to falsely inflate its revenue by tens of millions of dollars.  To conceal the fact that DiscoCare owed ArthroCare a substantial amount of money on the unused inventory, Raffle and others caused ArthroCare to acquire DiscoCare on Dec. 31, 2007.

According to court documents, between December 2005 and December 2008, ArthroCare’s shareholders held more than 25 million shares of ArthroCare stock.  On July 21, 2008, after ArthroCare announced publicly that it would be restating its previously reported financial results from the third quarter 2006 through the first quarter 2008 to reflect the results of an internal investigation, the price of ArthroCare shares dropped from $40.03 to $23.21 per share.  The drop in ArthroCare’s share price caused an immediate loss in shareholder value of more than $400 million.

Raffle faces a maximum prison sentence of five years in prison for each charge.  A sentencing date has yet to be scheduled.  Raffle’s co-defendant David Applegate pleaded guilty on May 9, 2013.  ArthroCare’s Chief Executive Officer, Michael Baker, and Chief Financial Officer, Michael Gluk, were indicted as part of the same alleged securities fraud scheme on July 16, 2013.  An indictment is merely a charge, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

This case was investigated by the FBI’s Austin office.  The case is being prosecuted by Deputy Chief Benjamin D. Singer and Trial Attorneys Henry P. Van Dyck and William Chang of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section.  The Department recognizes the substantial assistance of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

TOP U.S. MILITARY LEADERS TELL SENATORS COMMANDERS SHOULD HAVE PROSECUTION AUTHORITY IN SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Commanders Should Retain Prosecution Authority, Leaders Say
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 18, 2013 - The nation's top military leaders told senators today that commanders should retain responsibility for prosecuting service members accused of sexual assault.

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Navy Adm. James A. Winnefeld Jr., the vice chairman, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that taking that authority away could harm good order and discipline.

Dempsey and Winnefeld are under Senate consideration for second two-year terms in their posts.

Keeping commanders in the process ensures there is an active deterrent to the crime, Winnefeld said. "Somebody who is contemplating a sexual assault knows that they're going to be caught, that they're going to be prosecuted, and if they're prosecuted, they're going to be punished," he said. "It's our strong view that the commander is responsible for that."

Dempsey told the senators that Army officials have looked at the numbers on sexual assault prosecutions over the past two years and found 35 cases in which civilian district attorneys refused to take sexual assault cases to court.

"And the chain of command in the military insisted that the case be taken inside the military chain of command," he said.

Of those cases, 25 resulted in a court-martial conviction.

"That's a 71 percent conviction rate," the chairman said. The civilian rate is between 18 and 22 percent.

Dempsey stressed that this was done because commanders insisted on taking these cases. "I worry that if we turn this over to somebody else, whether it's a civilian DA or an entity in the military, that they're going to make the same kind of decisions that those civilian prosecutors make," he said.

Commanders must be responsible for ensuring the command climate does not tolerate sexual assault in any manner, Winnefeld said.

"It's about teaching people what a heinous crime this is," he added. "It's about reporting it if you see it. It's about intervening if you see it about to happen -- a whole host of measures that commanders must take to establish the climate inside their commands."

The Marine Corps also had examples similar to the Army, the admiral said. The Marine Corps went back to 2010 and found 28 cases in which civilian prosecutors declined to take the case.

"Of those, 16 of them, the Marine Corps was able to obtain a conviction of court-martial -- 57 percent," Winnefeld said. "So those are 16 perpetrators that are no longer walking the street and 16 victims who received justice who would not have received it otherwise."