Mr. Birkenfeld pleaded guilty to helping Mr. Olenicoff evade $7.2 million in taxes on $200 million in hidden offshore assets. Mr. Birkenfeld will be sentenced in August. Mr. Olenicoff pleaded guilty last year to filing a false 2002 tax return.
"With regard to whistleblowers: those who seek to be treated as true whistleblowers need to know they must come in early and give complete and truthful disclosures.... Mr. Birkenfeld did not come in and give complete and truthful disclosures. Therefore, he is not entitled to whistleblower status."
Zloch, who didn’t explain his reasoning, could have given Birkenfeld a maximum five-year term. Prosecutors had noted that Birkenfeld didn’t initially reveal his role in the scheme when he first came forward as a whistleblower.
The earlier a whistleblower comes in, he will both be (a) less implicated in whatever dirty business was going on, and (b) he will have less valuable information.
In effect, such rules help conspirators, because they can use it against one another: if you break the conspiracy, the US govt will use your lateness in coming forward, and your compliance with the conspiracy up to date, against you.
"With regard to whistleblowers: those who seek to be treated as true whistleblowers need to know they must come in early and give complete and truthful disclosures.... Mr. Birkenfeld did not come in and give complete and truthful disclosures. Therefore, he is not entitled to whistleblower status."
Late as he came forward, if it had been the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, he would have been entitled to whistleblowing protection. It wasn't, which is why he's in prison, but was of value which is why he's doing less time than he could have been.
> With regard to whistleblowers: those who seek to be treated as true whistleblowers need to know they must come in early
> Late as he came forward, if it had been the truth, [...] he would have been entitled to whistleblowing protection
It seems you are drawing a conclusion that isn't warranted by the quote.
IMO, there is no way to give the whole truth about any situation. That edict is disingenuous and always has been; it's easy to elicit more details by drilling down, and it's similarly easy to interpret words in a way that they weren't meant to give the wrong impression - selective quoting is an art mastered by tabloids everywhere. And also, it's natural to be reticent about implicating oneself in a crime - in fact, there are laws permitting silence on risk of self-incrimination for very good reasons. It seems that you suggest whistleblowers should be denied this.
There are two criteria for protection in the quote:
* Come in early
* Give complete and truthful disclosures
Come in early is a clear problem, I agree, partly because as I recall the way penalties are structured means everyone has an incentive to let it happen for as long as they can be confident that no-one else will implicate them.
However, the information we have is that he didn't initially reveal that he was a part of the illegal scheme.
The whole point of whistleblowing legislation is to permit those involved with conspiracies to come forwards and expose their fellow conspirators in exchange for their own liberty. I apologise for inadvertent selective quotation but he was trying to have his cake and eat it; to gain the credit for exposing the wrongdoing of others while withholding details of his own wrongdoing, thus distorting the evidential picture. Whistleblowing law is designed to let people in his situation bring down others by breaking the devil's pact of mutual downfall that would otherwise result, and so by definition to gain this unusual protection requires candid self-incrimination.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/business/20tax.html
Mr. Birkenfeld pleaded guilty to helping Mr. Olenicoff evade $7.2 million in taxes on $200 million in hidden offshore assets. Mr. Birkenfeld will be sentenced in August. Mr. Olenicoff pleaded guilty last year to filing a false 2002 tax return.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_Birkenfeld
"With regard to whistleblowers: those who seek to be treated as true whistleblowers need to know they must come in early and give complete and truthful disclosures.... Mr. Birkenfeld did not come in and give complete and truthful disclosures. Therefore, he is not entitled to whistleblower status."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a...
Zloch, who didn’t explain his reasoning, could have given Birkenfeld a maximum five-year term. Prosecutors had noted that Birkenfeld didn’t initially reveal his role in the scheme when he first came forward as a whistleblower.