LOCKHEED MARTIN WATCH

It's Not the Crime in the Streets,
It's the Crime in the Corporate Suites

On August 10, 1999, the Associated Press reported that a federal Grand Jury was investigating whether Lockheed Martin paid kickbacks to a retired Taiwanese Air Force Officer, Richard Hei, to gain contracts for military radar systems.

Other defense contractors that employed Hei have been fined and convicted based on similar allegations, but Lockheed Martin denied wrongdoing, claimed to be "cooperating" with investigators and declined further comment.

The AP reported that the investigation is focusing on the 1990 actions of New Hampshire based Sanders, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed at the time of the alleged kickbacks. An AP source also indicated that the Grand Jury was looking into other Lockheed sales.

According to Tim Weiner, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist with the New York Times, "Lockheed has a criminal history that includes paying millions of dollars in bribes."

Attorney J. Whitfield Larrabee, founder of Lockheed Martin Watch, applauded the investigation, stating "the allegations fit Lockheed's prior criminal modus operandi. Payments to Hei may have violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 ("FCPA"), which prohibits the payment of bribes and kickbacks to foreign officials and their agents to secure contracts. If federal subsidies were involved in the contracts under question, the False Claims Act may have also been violated."

In 1994, a federal grand jury indicted Lockheed executive Slueiman Nassar on corruption and fraud charges tied to the sale of C-130 cargo planes to Egypt.

Nassar's indictment charged that Lockheed had violated the FCPA and had engaged in wire fraud through a number of high level executives, including bribing a member of the Egyptian Parliament.

LOCKHEED MARTIN WATCH

is a project sponsored by

J. Whitfield Larrabee 
& Associates

A People's Law Firm

Representing Employees and Whistleblowers

larrabee@gis.net

free initial telephone and e-mail consultations
(please see caution below on e-mail interception)

Caution: Because of the risk of interception, any information that you wish to keep confidential should not be communicated via e-mail. Although our firm will treat information that you send us as privileged and confidential, the public nature of the internet creates a risk of third party interception. E-mail sent out over a network owned by an employer may be the property of the employer and may be recovered through copies stored on the server under the employer's control.

Notice and Disclaimer: This page may be considered an advertisement under the rules of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The information provided at this site is for educational purposes only, and should not be considered legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is established through use of the materials on this site or through an initial consultation. You should only consider that an attorney client-relationship with J. Whitfield Larrabee & Associates is established upon execution of a written fee agreement. 

  J. Whitfield Larrabee & Associates

This page has been visited times since January 1, 1999

cases excepted in all courts in Boston, Cambridge, Brookline and Eastern Massachusetts