Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ORIGINAL A LED
ORDER OF THE COURT
JEFFFERSON B. SESSIONS III
United States Attorney General hled in tup
MICHAEL G. WHEAT,CRN 118598 district COURT
ERIC J. BESTE, CRN 226089 DISTRICTOFHAWAII
JANAKI S. GANDHI,CRN 272246
COLIN M. MCDONALD,CRN 286561
Special Attorneys to the Attorney General SUE SEITiA,a^RK
880 Front Street, Room 6293
San Diego, CA 92101
Tel: 619-546-8437/8817/9144
Email: michaeLwheat@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States
CaseNo^ lT-01217kSC
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff,
Defendant.
knowingly and willfully combine, conspire, and agree together, with each other
and with others to commit the following offenses against the United States:
provide false information to the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS)
and the United States Attomey's Office for the District of Hawaii(USAO-Hawaii),
and present false testimony and evidence in a criminal trial in the United States
conspirators committed the overt acts outlined in the affidavit in support of this
Silva (charged elsewhere) to place into evidence only the excised portions of the
data recovered from the surveillance video hard drive from Co-conspirator No. 1
Investigation (FBI) and that this complaint is based on the following affidavit
which is attached hereto and made part of this complaint by this reference.
RICHARD L. PUGLlgi
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Hawaii
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 4 of 22 PageID #: 4
employed as such since July 2014. Prior to joining the FBI, I was a Connecticut
violations of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 371,1519,1512(c), and 1001. 1
have received specialized training pertaining to these and other areas offederal law.
1 am currently assigned to the White Collar Squad in the Honolulu Division of the
FBI. In the course of my duties, 1 have prepared and executed search, seizure, and
arrest warrants.
371. Because of the limited purpose of this affidavit, it does not contain every fact
indicated, all dates and times discussed below are approximations in Hawaii Standard
Time.
believe HAHN and other co-conspirators did knowingly and willfully combine,
conspire, and agree together, with each other and with others to commit the following
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 5 of 22 PageID #: 5
offenses against the United States: to destroy, alter, or falsify records in violation of
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1519; to corruptly obstruct, influence, and
impede an official proceeding, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
1512(c); and to knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious, and
fraudulent statement in a matter within the jurisdiction ofthe executive branch ofthe
Government ofthe United States in violation ofTitle 18, United States Code,Section
1001. The information contained below is from my personal knowledge, other law
located at CCl and CC6's residence at approximately 11:30 p.m. on June 21, 2013.
As discussed more fully below,a video recording was apparently made ofthe alleged
theft. I have reviewed the video footage. It shows a white, four-door sedan drive up
and park directly in front of the residence. A male with facial hair and wearing a
baseball hat exits the driver's side of the vehicle, walks to the mailbox, inspects the
mailbox for a few seconds, and then^with little effortremoves the security-style
mailbox off its metal post. The male then opens the rear passenger door and places
the mailbox inside the vehicle. After closing the door, the male walks around the rear
5. Eight days later, CCl's uncle, G.P.K., was arrested for stealing the
mailbox. At that time, G.P.K. was a plaintiff (along with his elderly grandmother
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 6 of 22 PageID #: 6
F.P.) in a civil lawsuit against CCl. Three people claimed to identify G.P.K. in the
marriage), and CC6(CCl's husband). But based on my review of the video footage
and observations of G.K.P., and the observations of others familiar with G.K.P. and
the footage, the male depicted in the video does not appear to be G.K.P. In addition,
G.K.P. has repeatedly denied being the person who "stole" CCl and CC6's mailbox,
indications of deception when he denied being the male depicted in the video.
Although polygraph results are generally not admitted into evidence in criminal cases,
based on my training and experience and the experience of other experienced agents
co-conspirator. One, the "thief separated the metal box from its pole^using only
his bare handsin just a few seconds. Two,the designer ofthe mailbox has indicated
that the bottom base of the mailbox is designed to break once the pole tilts to 15
degrees. Yet based on the surveillance video, it appears the mailbox tilted up to 20
degrees without breaking the base. That suggests the interior assembly ofthe mailbox
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 7 of 22 PageID #: 7
was altered to allow for quick removal. Third, only one hour of surveillance video
was preserved from CCl and CC6's surveillance system; the rest was not only not
unknown officers inside the Criminal Intelligence Unit ("CIU") of the Honolulu
Police Department("HPD").
THE CONSPIRACY
the investigation, prosecution, mistrial, and ultimate dismissal with prejudice of the
criminal case against G.K.P. In particular, the FBI has been investigating whether
police officers in HPD's CIU, along with other co-conspirators, made false
statements, and fabricated, altered, and concealed evidence in order to support the
intelligence and data on organized crime, terrorism, and other serious threats facing
the City and County of Honolulu. In the course of their general duties, officers in
CIU do not prepare or write reports recording or regarding their official police
HPD's Chief of Police. Due to that close relationship, the Chief of Police plays a
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 8 of 22 PageID #: 8
direct role in selecting and appointing officers to CIU.(As one high-ranking HPD
witness testimony and records provided by HPD, HAHN was appointedat the
CIU's acting captain and commanding officer in 2014. That same year, as evidenced
Consumer Affairs, HAHN started a business with CCl,the one whose mailbox was
allegedly "stolen" by G.K.P. CCl is married to CC6, who was HPD's Chief of
Police when HAHN was made lieutenant and commanding officer of CIU.
Silva appeared in United States District Court for the District of Hawaii, waived
Records in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1519; Corruptly
18, United States Code, Section 1512(c); and Making False Statements, in violation
of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001. As part of his guilty plea, Silva
admitted under oath that he agreed with various co-conspirators to commit these
G.P.K. for the thefl of a mailbox from the residence of CCl. Silva further admitted
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 9 of 22 PageID #: 9
that as part of the conspiracy, he and CC2 provided false information to a United
States Postal Inspection Service ("USPIS") Inspector and discussed "the false
testimony [they] expected to provide" at G.P.K.'s trial. Silva also admitted various
overt acts were committed by the co-conspirators as part of the conspiracy. Those
acts ranged from falsely identifying G.K.P. as the person depicted "stealing" the
within CIU retrieved the surveillance video, to excising portions of the surveillance
video, to failing to preserve the original hard drive containing the entire surveillance
Silva to not put the original hard drive into HPD evidence. According to Silva, CC3
isHAHN.'
OVERT ACTS
cause to believe the following overt acts, among others, were committed within the
^ Silva has pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement and is cooperating with the
investigation in the hope ofreceiving a sentencing reduction. United States v. Silva,
Case No. CR16-00787-SOM (D. Hawaii). Although Silva has admitted providing
false information to investigators as part of the conspiracy, and testifying falsely
under oath in the criminal trial of G.K.P., the information Silva has provided in
connection with his guilty plea has proven to be reliable and corroborated by other
evidence.
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 10 of 22 PageID #: 10
a. On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 (just two days before the alleged
mailbox "theft"), CCl was deposed in the civil action between her and G.K.P. and
P.P. According to CC2, HAHN directed CC2 to the location of the deposition. At
the time, CC2 was related by marriage to CCl and CC6 and lived at their residence.
After CC2 arrived at the location of CCl's deposition, he had a conversation with
P.P. While CC2 has stated he cannot recall the details of their conversation, P.P.
stated that CC2 asked her questions about G.P.K., including what type ofcar he was
driving. P.P. mistakenly told CC2 that G.P.K. drove a white sedan, i.e., the color of
he traveled to or near the immediate area of CCl and CC6's residence around 2:28
p.m. on Priday, June 21, 2013^approximately nine hours before the mailbox
"theft." No surveillance video is available for this time period; as described below,
car to the front of CCl and CC6's then personal residence, walked from the car to
the mailbox in the front yard, lifted the unsecured mailbox from its post, placed it in
d. The next moming, Saturday, June 22, 2013, CC6, according to his
6:00," to go surfing. That was when he "noticed [the] mailbox [wasn't] there." CC6
testified that he "decided to wait [to] report it and let my wife [CCl] know when I
came home." At "maybe 9:30 that morning," he returned home and "told [his] wife
[CCl] what had happened." CC6 testified that CCl reported the theft to the police.
2013, CCl telephoned "911" to report the alleged theft of a Postal Service mailbox
from CCl's residence the night before. However, immediately before that call, as
revealed by cellular telephone records, CC2 called CCl and they spoke for two
p.m." on June 22, 2013 (i.e., before CCl and CC2 spoke on the phone), CC2
"removed the hard drive from the security system at CCl's residence." As described
further below, Silva has also stated that CC2 told Silva that CC2 seized the hard
drive from CCl and CC6's residence at 9:00 a.m. on June 22, 2013.
HAHN was at or near the immediate area of CCl and CC6's residence from
approximately 8:12 a.m. to 9:26 a.m. on June 22, 2013. No surveillance video is
available for this time period; as described below, the video appears to have been
2013, an HPD beat officer (with no familial or business ties to the conspirators)
arrived at CCl's residence in response to the 911 call to investigate the complaint of
the alleged stolen mailbox. As part of the initial investigation, CCl completed the
In his report,the responding officer noted that CCl was "pretty sure that there
was mail in the mailbox, possibly bank statements." The responding officer also
indicated that "per [CCl] she has security cameras in the area but she has not
reviewed it at this time until a relative retrieves it for her to review. She will call
HPD if anything shows up and submit the DVD." CCl did not inform the officer
that the surveillance video system belonged to HPD or that the hard drive containing
interview that on Saturday, June 22, 2013, he received a call from HAHN on his
work cell phone. At the time, HAHN called Silva to tell him to report to the HPD
Main Station because there had been an incident at CCl's residence. Telephone toll
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 13 of 22 PageID #: 13
records reveal that on June 22, 2013, at 2:31 p.m., HAHN contacted Silva.
5("CC5") were present. Sometime thereafter, as Silva admitted in his plea, HAHN
and a CIU command officer "assigned [Silva] to assist CC2." CC2 handed Silva the
hard drive from CCl's home video surveillance system. Silva asked CC2 what time
he seized the hard drive; CC2 told Silva 9:00 a.m. Silva wrote down 8:59 a.m. on
the evidence chain form, falsely indicating that he (Silva) had retrieved the hard
drive at that time. Silva and CC2 collectively agreed to put down this false
j. During the afternoon of June 22,2013, Silva was present with CC2 as
the two officers reviewed the video from CCl's residence. According to Silva, CC2
identified G.K.P. as the person depicted on the hard drive "stealing" the mailbox.
he first saw the footage of the alleged mailbox theft at the HPD Main Station on
June 22, 2013, after he assisted Silva with retrieving the hard drive from CCl and
CC6's residence. As discussed above, on December 16,2016, Silva pled guilty and
admitted, among other things, that CC2 had removed the hard drive from the
residence, not Silva. Silva has elsewhere stated that he was not present when CC2
removed the hard drive, and did not see the hard drive until after arriving at the HPD
10
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 14 of 22 PageID #: 14
portions of data recovered from the hard drive that CC2 retrieved from CCl's
residence, and transferred those excised portions to disks. According to Silva and
an HPD Follow-up report, completed and signed by Silva on July 1, 2013, a total of
four(4) discs containing surveillance video were logged into evidence. According
to Silva, on or about June 22,2013, after 2:30pm, at the HPD Main Station, he gave
copies of the excised surveillance videos to other co-conspirators who were HPD
officers.
was not submitted into evidence - despite HPD protocol to the contrary. This was
because HAHN instructed Silva not to put the original hard drive into HPD
evidence; instead, Silva kept the hard drive in his desk. Silva inquired with HAHN
on three separate occasions as to what he should do with the original hard drive.
communication with CCl and CC6 on June 22 and 23, 2013. HAHN and CCl
contacted each other by text messaging approximately 30 times between 7:10 p.m.
and 8:01 p.m. on June 22,2013.HAHN and CCl exchanged approximately ten more
text messages between 2:49 a.m. and 2:56 a.m.on June 23,2013. Later that morning.
11
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 15 of 22 PageID #: 15
HAHN and CC6 spoke twice on the phone for approximately six minutes and one
minute.
the surveillance footage, and identified the person "stealing" the mailbox as G.K.P.
documents." According to the lieutenant, CCl asked him to review the documents
to determine if he could make out a criminal case against CCl's "uncle" for "fraud
and elder abuse" against CCl's "grandmother." The lieutenant was not aware that
"the uncle" was a suspect in the mailbox investigation. CCl appeared "frazzled"
and "very nervous, very afraid. She was on edge." The lieutenant listened to CCl's
complaint and reviewed the material, but did not understand how CCl's allegations
amounted to elder abuse. The lieutenant did not accept the case for investigation.
command officer specifically asked the Major to assign CID homicide detectives
and see what they want you to do." According to statements made by McCormick
12
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 16 of 22 PageID #: 16
and Akagi,the two detectives worked as a team and alternated lead on their assigned
cases. Akagi happened to be the next one up, so he became the assigned lead on the
mailbox case. As to whom they would report about the mailbox investigation, the
Major has stated:"From that point on that's going to be a CIU party, so he's going
HAJHN, who was a lieutenant in CIU. HAHN informed Akagi that there was a
white Acura sedan by G.K.P.'s house that "matched" the vehicle in the surveillance
video. That vehicle belonged to G.K.P.'s neighbor, C.A.(G.K.P. did not actually
own a white sedan similar to the one depicted in the surveillance video). However,
a comparison of C.A.'s vehicle and the suspect vehicle from the video reveals
several differences; they do not match. Akagi and McCormick have since
twice by telephone on June 25,2013;they spoke for approximately one minute each
time.
evening of June 22, 2013, through approximately 5:30 p.m. on Saturday, June 29,
13
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 17 of 22 PageID #: 17
t. On Thursday, June 27, 2013, CCl and CC6 pursued another charge
against G.K.P: they filed a police report claiming a burglary at their residence, and
identified G.K.P. as the suspect(even though he was under surveillance at the time).
As reported, CCl claimed she parked her "undamaged" vehicle inside their garage
on June 23, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. The next day, at about 1:50 p.m., CCl left the
residence and drove directly to HPD. In the HPD garage, CC6 then informed CCl
that her car's rear left tail light was damaged. CC6 said that when he arrived home,
he "inspect[ed]the area in the garage where[CC1]parks her vehicle for any physical
evidence," such as "shattered lens glass on the ground." CC6 "did not discover any
evidence." But then, two days later (June 26, 2013), CCl allegedly discovered
"pieces ofthe shattered lens from her vehicle near the refrigerator next to where she
parks her vehicle." And on Jxme 27, 2013, CC6 conducted a "closer inspection" of
the garage and "discovered the driver's side door to his [Chevy Nova] ajar and a
screwdriver that he does not remember owning on the floor board behind the driver's
seat." CCl and CC6 identified G.K.P. as the suspect. The author ofthe police report
was CCl. CCl has since admitted that "[ujsually in CIU we don't really write
reports," and "it's not a part of CIU to do it, to make reports." CC2 also revealed
that it was HAHN who directed him to write the report. CCl signed the burglary
14
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 18 of 22 PageID #: 18
and 7:52 p.m., HAHN and CCl exchanged approximately two phone calls and 17
text messages.
HAHN approximately three text messages between 3:33 a.m. and 3:40 a.m. CCl's
husband,CC6,then called HAHN for approximately one minute at 9:17 a.m. HAHN
called CC6 back at 9:41 a.m. for approximately two minutes. CC6 called HAHN
again at 9:43 a.m., and they spoke for approximately five minutes.
the surveillance footage and identified the suspect in the video as G.K.P. CCl did
not provide any information about why she believed the person depicted in the video
telephone records, between 5:09 p.m. and 5:12 p.m., HAHN and CC6 exchanged
approximately three phone calls. The records further show that HAHN had
additional contact with CCl and CC6 by phone between 8:40 p.m. and 9:16 p.m.
HAHN "instructed [Silva] to place into HPD evidence only the excised portions of
15
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 19 of 22 PageID #: 19
y. That same day, on July 1, 2013, G.P.K. was charged with "willfully
t[earing] down a receptacle used for the receipt of mail on a mail route," in violation
at which time he falsely reported that he was present when Silva recovered the hard
drive from CCl's residence on June 22, 2013. In addition to being contradicted by
Silva's admissions under oath in his guilty plea, CC2's claim is contradicted by bank
records showing that at the time CC2 says he was meeting with Silva at CCl's
in Honolulu.
aa. In December 2013,before Silva retired, he asked HAHN about the hard
drive containing the original video footage from CCl and CC6's residence;
criminal prosecution was ongoing at this time. The original hard drive was placed
back into circulation in December 2013 on Silva's last day of work before he retired.
subpoena duces tecum to CCl and CC6,commanding them to produce any "[v]ideo
surveillance footage for [C1 and C6's residence] from noon of June 20, 2013,
through the time that the mailbox at issue in this case was stolen." The subpoena
16
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 20 of 22 PageID #: 20
video footage obtained by the FBI, however, unknown members of CIU recorded
over the hard drive that had been recovered from CCl and CC6's residence. Instead
ofimages ofthe front ofCCl and CC6's residence(where the mailbox was located),
the recording captured the ceiling in the CIU office for six straight days; various CIU
technicians were also briefly visible. Based on the date stamp from the CIU ceiling
recording, it appears the recording was made within days after G.K.P.'s defense
attomey secured the subpoena for the original hard drives from CCl and CC6's
cc. On or about June 18, 2014, at about 10:49 a.m., Silva falsely told a
USPIS Inspector that he personally recovered the hard drive from CCl's residence.
was working properly. He stated he then recovered the hard drive and transported it
dd. Based on cellular telephone records for Silva obtained by the FBI, and
Silva's statements since his cooperation began, Silva and CCl repeatedly discussed
the false statements they were both providing to federal investigators. For example,
on or about June 18,2014, at about 1:17 p.m., after Silva spoke to USPIS Inspectors,
he called CC2. The next day(June 19,2014), Silva again provided false information
to the USPIS Inspector about HPD's"investigation" ofan alleged mailbox theft from
CCl's residence. And the following day(June 20,2014), Silva again called CC2.
17
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 21 of 22 PageID #: 21
ee. According to Silva and telephone toll records obtained by the FBI, on
or about December 1, 2014, CC2 and Silva discussed the false testimony the
conspirators expected to provide at the upcoming federal criminal trial of G.K.P. for
G.K.P. that on June 22, 2013, at 8:59 a.m., he personally went to CCl's residence,
verified the security system was in good working order on the date and time of the
incident (June 21, 2013, 10:31 p.m.), that recordings were made, and that he
retrieved the recordings from the residence. Silva also confirmed preparing reports
(falsely) documenting his retrieval of the hard drive. Silva's testimony ended at
gg. CC6 was the next witness at G.K.P.'s trial. He testified that he
recognized the "thief in the surveillance video as G.K.P. When asked how he
recognized G.K.P., CC6 responded, in part, that "how [G.K.P.] looks in this video
is how he looked when he was charged and convicted for breaking into his
neighbor's house." Based on that remark,the trial judge granted G.K.P.'s motion for
hh. Based on cellular telephone records for CC2 and Silva obtained by the
and CC6's testimony against G.K.P. and subsequent mistrial), CC2 and Silva texted
18
Case 1:17-mj-01217-KSC Document 2 Filed 10/18/17 Page 22 of 22 PageID #: 22
approximately seven(7)times between 10:30 a.m. and 11:17 a.m. Based on cellular
telephone records for HAHN,HAHN and Silva then spoke over the phone at least
two (2) times between 11:23 a.m. and 11:27 a.m., with a phone call that lasted
approximately 18 minutes at 11:27 a.m. Thereafter, Silva and CC2 texted and spoke
over the phone around 1:48 p.m., and HAHN and CC2 texted approximately nine
(9)times. Silva has stated that he and CC2 discussed the false evidence provided in
Based on these facts and circumstances, there is probable cause to believe that
DEREK WAYNE HAHN and other co-conspirators did knowingly and willfully
combine, conspire, and agree together, with each other and with others in violation
RICHARD L. PUGLISI
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Hawaii
19