Postal Fraud p.9

By: Debra Gersh Hernandez

Society of Professional Journalists protests recent actions
of postal inspectors who posed as reporters for a ficticious magazine to interview a postal worker on workers' compensation;
government official says they'll do it again, if necessary sp.

A RECENT UNDERCOVER probe by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, in which inspectors posed as reporters for a fictitious publication, has raised the ire of journalists.
In a letter to Postmaster General Marvin Runyon, Society of Professional Journalists president Reginald Stuart of Knight-Ridder called the action "indefensible" and urged Runyon "to issue a strong policy statement making it clear that such activity is unacceptable and is not to be repeated."
The case came out of Saginaw Township, Mich., where postal inspectors posed as reporters for a fictitious magazine called Small Business Quarterly.
The inspectors used this guise to interview a Postal Service employee who was collecting workers' compensation because she claimed a back and shoulder injury from 1993 left her unable to work.
Inspectors posing as journalists interviewed the woman about her extensive work at a crafts shop she and her husband own, which allegedly was performed during the period she claimed she was unable to work for the Postal Service.
"The act of federal investigators posing as journalists may be legal, but is totally unacceptable and a clear violation of common ethics by an agency considered a public trust," Stuart wrote to Runyon.
Stuart noted that inspectors have
"a wide range of resources available to legitimately investigate alleged wrongdoing by employees or users of the postal system without having to resort to the journalists' tactics used in this instance . . . "
"We place a high premium on truth and honesty and do not condone reporters posing as anything other than reporters," Stuart continued. "It violates a public trust to do otherwise. We hope you feel the same way about postal workers."
Stuart's letter pointed to a quote from a postal spokesman that this is "not a widespread policy," and he told E&P that may suggest there are other such cases.
Daniel Mihalko, manager of congressional public affairs for the Postal Inspection Service, however, said this case was the first he'd ever heard of where inspectors posed as journalists.
Mihalko noted that Department of Justice guidelines and federal appellate court decisions allow investigators to pose as journalists.
In addition, the action was approved by the inspectors' supervisor, he said.
There are "no prohibitions against using any particular type of undercover identity," Mihalko said, adding that inspectors "would not adopt any [disguise] that would cause a violation of confidentiality.
"I would certainly see a problem if we posed as reporters for a legitimate news-gathering organization, such as the Washington Post or something," he added.
"In this case, they represented themselves as journalists for a fictitious business journal. The information they gathered was volunteered by the individual in this case. This person knew it was going to be published, although in this case it was fictitious. There was no promise of confidentiality in exchange for the interview," Mihalko said, noting he would have a problem if confidentiality were promised and then used against the individual.
"This is a sensitive issue," he conceded, saying he was sensitive to the concerns of the journalism profession.
But in light of the fact that the practice has not been prohibited by DoJ or the courts, Mihalko was "not prepared to say we are never going to do it again. It is not a routine investigative technique, but if we feel it can further a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, we will use it."
Mihalko further pointed out that it is a risky technique, since it is so easy to check out. If the investigator claims to be working for an existing news outlet, a simple call can verify that. If the organization is false that, too, can be discovered.