Federal Corruption Cases Expose Fraud and Bid-Rigging Schemes Across Agencies
Two separate federal cases have highlighted ongoing efforts to combat fraud and corruption within government ranks, involving a former Bureau of Prisons officer and a former FBI procurement official accused of exploiting their positions for financial gain.
In Florida, former correctional officer Keevin Jones, who was previously assigned to the Federal Correctional Institution Coleman, was sentenced on April 28, 2026, to two years of probation after pleading guilty to wire fraud. He was also ordered to pay $29,610 in restitution.
According to court documents, Jones fraudulently applied for approximately $60,000 in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) funds between June and July 2020, ultimately receiving nearly $30,000. Investigators from the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General, including its Fraud Detection Office and Southeast Region, led the case.
Meanwhile, in California, a former FBI employee and his sister have agreed to plead guilty in a bid-rigging scheme that secured hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal contracts.
Jeffrey Spencer, 51, a former electronics technician at the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office, and Christy Evereklian, 43, were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States. Prosecutors say the pair manipulated the competitive bidding process for electronic equipment contracts over a five-year period.
According to plea agreements filed in federal court, Spencer used his position overseeing contract bids to coordinate with Evereklian, who submitted multiple bids through companies she controlled. The bids appeared competitive but were prearranged, ensuring one of her companies would win. To conceal the scheme, Evereklian used relatives’ names and generated fake bid amounts using a random number tool.
Authorities say the scheme resulted in at least $350,000 in contracts being awarded to Evereklian’s businesses. Both defendants face up to five years in federal prison and are expected to formally enter their guilty pleas in the coming weeks.
Ex-Texas Prison Guard Opened Cell Door for Inmate Beat-Down Over Spitting, Feds Say
RUSK, Texas — A former Texas corrections officer admitted in federal court this week that he unlocked an inmate’s cell and allowed fellow guards to pummel the man — all because the prisoner had spat on him two days earlier.
Samuel Thomas, who worked at a Texas Department of Criminal Justice facility in Rusk, pleaded guilty Monday to one count of conspiracy to violate an inmate’s civil rights, the Justice Department announced. The charge stems from a Feb. 25 attack on an inmate identified only as M.S.
Thomas, now facing up to a decade in federal prison, was on duty when he opened M.S.’s cell door and let other members of the conspiracy “strike and injure” the man, according to his plea agreement. The beating was an act of retaliation, prosecutors said, driven by a spit attack against Thomas on Feb. 23.
The inmate suffered bodily injury as a direct result.
“This former corrections officer engaged in a conspiracy to beat and injure a man in his care and custody,” said Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Today’s conviction reinforces the Justice Department’s commitment to protect victims from state officials who abuse their power.”
Thomas’s plea, entered before U.S. Magistrate Judge John D. Love, marks a rare admission of criminal wrongdoing by a prison employee in an excessive-force case. His sentencing date has not yet been set.
Under the terms of the plea agreement, Thomas faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000. A federal judge will determine the final sentence based on U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other legal factors.
“Today’s guilty plea sends a clear message that corruption by those entrusted with public safety will not be tolerated,” said U.S. Attorney Jay R. Combs for the Eastern District of Texas. “Correctional officers hold positions of tremendous responsibility and authority, and when that trust is abused, it undermines the integrity of our justice system and jeopardizes the safety of inmates and staff. Nobody is above the law.”
The charge — violating 18 U.S.C. § 241 — is a federal criminal civil rights statute that makes it illegal for two or more people to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten or intimidate someone in the free exercise of a constitutional right. Inmates retain a right under the Eighth Amendment to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, including deliberate assaults by corrections officers.
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice has not announced any internal disciplinary actions against Thomas, who is no longer employed by the agency. Prison watchdog groups have long pointed to the Rusk facility — a transfer unit housing thousands of inmates — as a site of repeated use-of-force complaints.
For now, the former officer who once held the keys to a prison cell is waiting to learn how long he’ll spend in one himself.
No Charges for Baltimore Police in Fatal Shooting of Woman in Mental Health Crisis, AG Says
BALTIMORE — A Baltimore police officer will not face criminal charges for fatally shooting a woman who was experiencing a mental health crisis last June, after investigators determined she advanced on an officer with a knife and a Taser failed to stop her, the state’s top prosecutor announced Monday.
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown said that following a nearly yearlong investigation, his office has declined to prosecute Officers Stephen Galewski and Stephen Colbert in the June 25, 2025 death of Pytorcarcha Brooks.
The decision, announced nearly 11 months after the shooting, concludes that the officers’ actions did not amount to a crime under Maryland law.
“After completing its investigation and evaluating all the available evidence, the Office of the Attorney General has determined that the subject officers did not commit a crime under Maryland law,” Brown said in a statement. “Accordingly, the Attorney General has declined to prosecute the subject officers in this case.”
The shooting unfolded around 1:35 p.m. on a Wednesday in the 2700 block of Mosher Street in Baltimore. Police had responded to two separate 911 calls: one requesting a welfare check, and another from a person who said a woman was trying to stab them.
When officers arrived, a family member told them that Brooks was not taking her prescribed medication, that she had tried to stab him when he attempted to enter the home, and that she had blocked the back door with a heavy object. Medics from the Baltimore City Fire Department also arrived to evaluate Brooks and determine if she needed hospital care.
First responders determined that Brooks was in the midst of a mental health crisis and lacked the capacity to refuse medical treatment, according to the attorney general’s independent investigation.
According to the report, medics and officers attempted to make contact through the back door, Brooks appeared, shouted obscenities and swiped a knife through the partially open doorway. After discussions among the responding team, it was decided that police would enter through the front door to secure Brooks so medics could transport her for evaluation.
Once inside, Officer Galewski encountered Brooks, who was holding a knife. Initially, she moved away from the officers. Galewski issued multiple verbal commands to drop the knife. Brooks did not comply. Instead, she advanced toward the officer.
Galewski deployed his Taser. It struck Brooks, but the shock was ineffective. She stood back up and again moved toward Galewski, still clutching the knife. As the officer tried to retreat, he tripped over a piece of furniture and fell to the ground. Brooks kept coming.
At that moment, Officer Colbert fired his weapon, striking Brooks. Officers immediately began rendering medical aid, and emergency crews took over. Brooks was transported to a nearby hospital, where she was pronounced dead.
The Attorney General’s Independent Investigations Division (IID) began its probe the same day as the shooting — June 25, 2025 — and wrapped up on May 11, 2026. The review included witness interviews, use-of-force analysis, body-worn camera footage and medical records.
Under Maryland law, police are justified in using deadly force when they reasonably believe it is necessary to protect themselves or others from imminent death or serious injury.
Critics argue that the officer, who is trained in defensive tactics and handling armed encounters, should have been capable of subduing an individual wielding a knife without resorting to lethal force. They point out that the victim was over 70 years old, suggesting the situation may have allowed for de-escalation or alternative restraint methods.
Advocates for accountability contend that, given the officer’s training and the apparent age and condition of the individual, the use of force raises serious questions about proportionality and decision-making in the moment.
Efforts to obtain a response from the department were unsuccessful, as officials could not be reached for comment at the time of publication.
Brown’s office did not release additional details about whether the officers remained on duty or faced any internal disciplinary action. The Baltimore Police Department has not immediately commented on the attorney general’s decision.
For Brooks’ family and mental health advocates, the announcement closes the criminal chapter of a case that underscores the dangers of responding to psychiatric emergencies with armed officers — a subject of ongoing debate in Baltimore and nationwide.
But legally, the attorney general was clear: No charges will be filed.
A copy of the IID’s detailed investigative findings and analysis of relevant legal issues can be found in its declination report.
About the Author
