The federal agency must prove this charge through preponderant evidence by showing:
On occasion, this charge is brought against an employee who attempted to gain false information from another or intimidated a witness. In these types of cases there would be an intent component. It should be noted that an agency may charge an employee with interference and frame the charge in such a way that intent is not an element.
The most common defense to this charge is to claim that the conduct did not occur as alleged or that the charged conduct did not rise to the level of interference.The Board has concluded that an employee did not intentionally attempt to influence and intimidate witnesses during an agency investigation when he simply told the witnesses to tell the truth, making references to lawyers and the possible filing of a civil suit. The MSPB has noted that misconduct’s effect on the investigation itself is an important penalty consideration.
The federal employee attorneys at Melville Johnson, P.C. are highly experienced in MSPB matters such as these, and are willing and able to assist you in your federal employment legal matters. Call or message us today to discuss your claim and learn how we can assist you.
 Castellanosv. Dept. of Army, 62 MSPR 315 (1994).