Home > ACO, Administrative Contracting Officer, Contract Dispute, DCMA, Defense Contract Management Agency, Department of Justice, DOJ, Small Business > How DOJ Attorney Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver Proved to Me Edward Snowden Is Right to Worry about a Fair Trial in the US

How DOJ Attorney Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver Proved to Me Edward Snowden Is Right to Worry about a Fair Trial in the US

DOJ Attorney Paul 'P.' Davis Oliver - Shown on QuimbaSoftware.Wordpress.com

Admits in writing Quimba does NOT owe the Government.
Is moving the case forward anyway.

For those of you who don’t know who Edward Snowden is, he was an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton corporation who blew the whistle on the massive US Government surveillance program, Prism. The data collection program records huge volumes of information on almost all of the US citizen digital activities, such as phone calls and emails. The program is implemented, managed, and conducted by the super-secretive US National Security Agency (NSA). As proof, Snowden released troves of data to a UK newspaper the Guardian and the Washington Post.

It is not relevant to this post if you consider Snowden a traitor or a hero. Personally, as of this writing, I have not made up my mind on that point yet myself.

It is also not relevant to this post if you think Snowden should stand trial for releasing sensitive information. Personally, I think he should because, at the very least, he violated his Non-Disclosure Agreement terms of his employment with Booz, as well as the terms of his Security Clearance Agreement. Only a jury should determine if he was right to violate those agreement which, presumably, he had willingly entered into.

What is relevant to this post here is that Edward Snowden is a fugitive today, possibly living in some nomad zone in the Moscow International Airport Terminal, because he does not believe he will receive a fair trial if he comes back to face the charges that the Department Of Justice (DOJ) has secured in a criminal indictment.

That is why the DOJ attorney, Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver factors in.

Attorney Oliver’s behavior, as described below, did in fact convince me that Snowden is right to be concerned about being treated fairly by the DOJ and, as of this writing, I fully support his efforts to garner as much publicity, and secure a “terms of prosecution” agreement before surrendering. The latter is particularly important since once trial proceedings begin the press will only report – but not offer any opinions to help – Snowden. Neither would his representatives. For those of you who care to ask, the “hands-off” approach by the press and our representatives when a case is pending in courts is in fact a good thing because it preserves the independence of our Judiciary – an extremely important factor in preserving our freedoms.

OK, now back to the DOJ attorney, Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver and what I said above.

For those of you who are new to the blog, it documents the destruction of a successful small company at the hands of the US Government bureaucrats, often acting with premeditated and deliberate intent, as documented in our posts, for example here and here. In summary, DCMA’s Craig M. Studley made a factual error in how much money US Government had paid us in 2004 on a certain contract, then levied a large debt on Quimba. The sticking point here is that, in violation of applicable laws (see this post), neither Craig Studley, nor anyone else in DCMA has been willing to correct the error. This refusal has forced Quimba out of business, inflicted significant personal and financial harm on its founders and employees, and, of course, has also set us off on an expensive (for both Quimba and US Taxpayers) litigation path.

On May 14, 2013 we served the Government with a Request for Admission. If you are not aware of what a Request for Admission is, it is just what the name implies – a tool that is used when a legal case enters “Discovery” stage. It is designed to reduce the litigation burden by enumerating points that litigants admit, or deny, to be true.

Not surprisingly, we asked the Government to admit that Quimba did not owe the Government $91K+ that ACO Craig Studley had asserted in his erroneous Contracting Officer’s Final Decision (COFD), dated March 2011.

On June 24, 2013, after we granted the Government a week’s extension when they requested it, we received their response to our Request for Admission.

In response to our Request for Response (question #9) that “Admit that the Plaintiff does NOT owe $91,992.777 to the United States as stated in the letter from ACO Craig Studley attached as Exhibit A.” the Government Attorney P. Davis Oliver wrote: “Admits and avers that Quimba was overpaid an amount other than $91,992.77.” [Emphasis added].

Doesn’t this remind you of Boss Hogg and every episode of Dukes of Hazard; every Police brutality case where the police argues that the defendant “may not have committed this crime but has surely committed some other crime some other time?”

Put in “street” terms, the DOJ attorney, Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver asserts: “yep, we admit we f*cked up and that DCMA ACO Craig Studley did make a dumb-a*s mistake but we are not going to do the right thing! Hell no! We are going to go fishing, because you know, US government bureaucrats are infallible and, besides, if we go fishing far enough and deep enough, I am sure we can make it so expensive that your f*cking small business and its mother-f*cking foreign-born as*hole founder will never challenge the United States Government again.”

As taxpayers, we should be outraged that our government will persecute – that is PERsecute – a small business over a claim that, by its own lawyer’s admission now, is in fact wrong.

While I am all for the US Government mounting an aggressive defense in response to any claim, I am absolutely ASHAMED of a “Justice” Department that is designed around winning a litigation, regardless of the merits of the case, and at any cost. I am ashamed of individuals like Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver representing me, as a US Citizen, because I believe the “Justice” department has a moral, ethical, and honor-bound obligation to admit when the Government is wrong and do the right thing, particularly by US citizens. For the record, I am one despite the funny last name.

And you know what? In my opinion, you should be ashamed of people like Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver representing you too. After all, as an American taxpayer-citizen which do you value more? Fairness and ethical behavior, or the Russia-China-North Korea-Iran style of winning-at-any-cost, and to hell with what we say the Ol’ Glory stands for? After all, our National Anthem is just a bunch of words that most of us can’t remember anyway.

Remember. “The Government” is not an abstract entity –  it is in fact no more than the collection of individuals like P. Davis Oliver and their actions; and sadly, “the Government” is as fair or honorable as the collective of these actions. So if the DOJ is so poorly managed and broken that it permits a low-ranking lawyer to unleash the full force of the US Government and its resources against a small business, even after  admitting in effect that the Government does not have a case, then how can you expect me to believe that Snowden will get a fair trial in the hands of the same people?

The complete and unredacted DOJ attorney P. Davis Oliver’s response to our Request for Admission is posted here. You can read and decide for yourself. Of course, in the interest of fairness, I must add that, in my opinion, many the faux pas committed in his response have originated by Srikanti Schaffner, DCMA attorney supporting this case, who, in my personal opinion, is exerting unduly large influence on Mr. Oliver’s actions and is exploiting P. Davis Oliver’s combined inexperience with CDA and his ambition to move to contract litigation, to implement DCMA’s agenda. We will of course discuss Ms. Schaffner’s motivation at a later time.

Those of you who are familiar with the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), can surely anticipate our response. The rest of you just have to wait! It’ll be worth it, I promise!!!

People in this post:
Bob Dourandish – bob@quimba.com
Craig Studley – ACO, DCMA – Craig.Studley@dcma.mil
Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver, Esq. (DOJ Attorney) – P.Davis.Oliver@usdoj.gov
Srikanti ‘Sri’ Schaffner, Esq. – Srikanti.Schaffner@dcma.mil

About these ads
  1. Avers
    December 19, 2013 at 9:27 am

    Avers means the Government believes it has facts evidencing you HAVE been overpaid but the amount in the COFD is in error. Your continual statements that DOJ admits you weren’t overpaid incorrectly characterizes DOJ’s answer and response.

    • March 9, 2014 at 2:17 pm

      I would disagree. If the amount of the COFD is an error, then legally the COFD has to be withdrawn (ASBCA 26028). The DOJ is insisting that it can “fix” the problem. This is not their job – that is the Contracting Officer’s job. Otherwise, why have contracting officers? Why not just litigate every single disagreement?

      In addition, the post does in fact correctly characterizes the DOJ’s unreasonable position – the DOJ attorney has no basis for making the above claim. He is not a contracting officer, nor is he an auditor. Paul ‘P.’ Davis Oliver’s position is akin to the IRS levying a debt on every American Citizen because s/he *might* owe some money. It is a ridiculous position taken by an inexperienced attorney with no meaningful supervision at the so-called Justice department.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 520 other followers