CASE STUDIES - INVESTIGATION OF EMPLOYEE MISCONDUCT

CASE STUDY

Investigation of Employee Misconduct and Defrauding the Department of Defense

Tags
Digital Forensics, Investigation, Department of Defense, Fraud, Internet Artifacts, Deleted File Recovery
Misconduct and Defrauding Case Study

Background

A manufacturer of specialized parts, mostly a Department of Defense contractor, retained Maryman to investigate allegations against two of its employees, Employee A and Employee B. Another employee reported that they overheard Employee A and Employee B discussing a side business of selling the same types of parts to the Department of Defense. The company wanted to see if they had stolen company property or utilized company property to aid in setting up this company to compete against it.

Scope and Preservation

The Maryman team proceeded with a full-scope digital forensics investigation to determine whether the allegations were true. We proceeded with documenting their workspace and inventorying all digital devices at their desks. We performed forensic imaging and preservation of their workstations, email accounts, domain profiles, and removable USB drives found in their desks.

Analysis and Findings

The forensic investigation and analysis uncovered key evidence that told the story
of what occurred. A forensic examination of Employee A’s workstation led to the recovery of deleted documents that were revealed to be business filings for the side business started by Employee A from his residence. Further analysis of Employee A’s system revealed deleted internet artifacts that uncovered submitted responses to Department of Defense Requests for Quotes (RFQs) for the same parts that had been submitted a week prior by the company, only this time the submissions had different part numbers. Additionally, the Maryman investigative team discovered that the side business of Employee A did not have the proper certifications to manufacture and sell these parts to the Department of Defense.

Next Steps

A referral to law enforcement led to the search warrant of Employee A’s property, revealing that he had worked with yet another employee, Employee C, who was working in the shipping department and stealing hundreds of inventory items for resale.
As far as Employee B? While the two of them were friends, analysis of Employee B’s system did not reveal any indication of knowledge of the fraud committed by Employee A. He was interviewed by both Brad Maryman and law enforcement, and submitted his phone voluntarily for analysis. No evidence was discovered to suggest that Employee B was aware of the actions committed by Employee A.

Outcomes

Ultimately, Employee A was arrested and found convicted of the above crimes, served several years in prison, and forced to pay restitution to our client.
Scroll to Top