FBI, ATF Constantly Feuding Over Bomb Investigations: Report

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - FBI, ATF Constantly Feuding Over Bomb Investigations: Report stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

DEVLIN BARRETT | 09/15/09 09:47 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

WASHINGTON — Agents of the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives are feuding over bomb investigations – racing each other to crime scenes, failing to share information and refusing to train together, according to a draft report obtained by The Associated Press.

The report says Justice Department bosses have repeatedly failed to fix the problem involving the two agencies that are part of their department.

The Justice Department's Inspector General, Glenn Fine, has drafted a preliminary report on the two agencies' repeated squabbles to claim jurisdiction in investigations of explosives incidents across the country – from Times Square in New York City to Arizona and the West Coast.

The most recent documented spat came last December when the FBI protested a local prosecutor's request to use the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to investigate a blast that killed a local bomb technician in Woodburn, Ore.

FBI and ATF supervisors "tend to deploy their employees to the larger, more sensational explosives incidents, sometimes racing each other to be the first federal agency on the scene and disputing upon arrival which agency should lead the investigation," according to a draft version of the report.

"Such conflicts can delay investigations, undermine federal and local relationships, and may project to local agency responders a disjointed federal response to explosives incidents in their area," the draft report found.

Officials in both agencies claim such problems have been resolved, yet the report stated that "disputes between the FBI and ATF continue to occur."

Changes and corrections are still being made to the draft document.

Story continues below

FBI and ATF officials issued a joint statement saying the agencies "have a long history of successful joint criminal investigations." The agencies said they are providing more information to the inspector general, but declined to comment on the draft until the final version is released. A Justice spokeswoman declined to comment.

The report, which analyzes the agencies' interactions from 2003 to early 2009, is expected to be released later this month, though an exact date was uncertain.

So-called "battles of the badges" between different law enforcement agencies are nothing new, but the ill will between FBI and ATF dates back decades and has survived the 2002 transfer of ATF from the Treasury Department to Justice. Some had thought putting the agencies in the same department might end the feud, but the Justice Department has spent years trying to get the two sides to cooperate.

The inspector general said the problem is exacerbated by the fact that Justice Department instructions don't clearly spell out who is in charge of federal responses to crime scenes involving explosives.

The confusion lies in the mandate of each agency: The FBI is charged with investigating terrorism in any form and the ATF is charged with investigating incidents in which explosives were used as a weapon.

Often, it is hard to tell when police first arrive on the scene whether the motive behind a bomb or explosive device is terrorism or something else.

Traditionally, it has been the job of the No. 2 official at the Justice Department to resolve such issues, but the inspector general found that for years, deputy attorneys general have failed to do so, despite written instructions issued in 2004 and 2008.

"We believe it is critical that DOJ issue a new directive to clearly define lead investigative authority between the FBI and ATF and require coordination of investigative actions," the draft report recommends.

While the two agencies are supposed to be entering information into a joint database, the review found the FBI hasn't entered anything into the database since 2004. The ATF has entered data into the system, but not consistently, the auditors found.

The two agencies also have separate training and laboratory facilities.

Other instances of turf fights cited in the report include:

_ In March 2008, both agencies responded to a bombing near a U.S. military recruiting station in Times Square. ATF sought to have the suspect charged immediately in what the inspector general called a "race to the courthouse" to take the case from the FBI, which was already pursuing the suspect in a different state.

_ In November 2007, the FBI was notified of a pipe bomb found in a truck at the Palo Verde nuclear plant in Arizona and claimed jurisdiction as a terrorism case. Notified several hours later, ATF disputed any connection to terrorism in a confrontation in front of local law enforcement officials.

_ In September 2007, an explosives incident at a bridge in San Diego, Calif., led FBI authorities to claim the matter was related to terrorism, which ATF publicly disputed.

WASHINGTON — Agents of the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives are feuding over bomb investigations – racing each other to crime scenes, failing to share infor...
WASHINGTON — Agents of the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives are feuding over bomb investigations – racing each other to crime scenes, failing to share infor...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
4
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- ranchero42 I'm a Fan of ranchero42 25 fans permalink
photo

Not having all the facts (I never got any kindergarten) all I can think is: "these guys need to learn to share". Also, wasn't there something in there about taking turns?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:28 AM on 09/16/2009
photo

So we need a third faction to learn to defuse both groups from wasting potentially vital time, which is what's happening. Potentially life-saving time being Wasted. I'm sure those bonuses Bush wrote into law for those who directly stifle terrorist activities aren't helping this issue between them, which applies to all State, Local, Tribal and Federal, law officials. I believe it applies to one or two people, but perhaps it can apply to small groups of officials as well, wherein upwards of $500,000 goes to that/those individual(s) that can dig up credible evidence, connecting terrorist plots. Now, i'm by no means insulting the integrity of either force, but would you fight a little bit harder to gain authority over a case that might net you a portion of a cool half mil? What's the alternative? Not fighting over who was first and working together is the exact viable alternative. Screw the money. Screw the condescension. Cooperate. Save lives. It's what you're both paid to do, and it's what you're paid to do because you're both supposed to be among those that do it best. This friction undermines both sides' professionalism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 PM on 09/15/2009
- mediamarv I'm a Fan of mediamarv 38 fans permalink
photo

Lose the ATF and save a bundle on their budgets. (Useless, redundant, cowboys... so I've been told.)

Use the money saved to train more linguists. That's what is really needed in the intelligence battle.

What senator protects them?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 PM on 09/15/2009

But they both did such a great job at Waco! Such professionalism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:36 PM on 09/15/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect