Should Government Employees be personally Liabile for fraud?

Question

I hope this stirs some good answers.

The question explained. I think government employees should be liable for their actions, whether by instruction or personal choice, when a reasonable person would see this activity as an unreasonable or questionable action.

Ex. An IRS employee hands down a fine. You want to appeal and they say there is no appealate process.

Ex. A DEA agent raids a house, on the orders of their superior, without knowing they do not have a search warrant. Had the agent asked to view the search warrant, they would have known it did not exist.

Ex. Military Service Acquisitions. A bean counter knowingly approves the purchase of a $400.00 toilet seat.

Ex. A Judge sentences a person to prison, on circumstantial evidence, and it is discovered later that this person was not the perpetrator. Had the judge not excluded evidence, the person would have been found not guilty immediately.

Answer 1

Absolutely, as the Rule of Law should apply to all, and not just to those that are not in Government.  Every person in a position of authority that makes a judgment that affects the rights of another should be held to account for that judgment.  That is the basics of Constitutional Gov. 101.

Answer 2

Yes-Yes of they should be--If we lived in a free democracy--they would be--the government employees-are just ordinary--people---But you wouldn't think they are--by the way the cat--

Answer 3

What are you hoping to do?  Create a money making racket for you personally?

Answer 4

1.  Unfortunately the IRS is not govt. so this question is a little off, but they should also be liable.

2.  If they were informed by their superior that the warrant did not exist, then I would hang the superior out to dry, not the subordingate.

3.  ABSOLUTELY!!!  These charges are part of a huge line of BS govt. waste that MUST be reined in.

4.  Our judicial system is so flawed by the liberal laws which protect the guilty that the judge probably had his hands tied.  This probably has to be addressed in the judicial system, not with a specific judge.

Though I agree that you have the right to be pissed off on all 4, I do not think that the bottom of the chain is the guilty party.

Answer 5

All FedGovt employees are held to an ethics standards. plain and simple.

Answer 6

I am not a legal expert but think of this:

  The government in all its forms has the right by law to all your money in the form of taxes to hire lawyers to defend its employees.  In fact the judges are also government employees.  And you though the government worked for you.

Answer 7

You can't sue the federal government. Individual employees are not usually held liable unless it can be proved that they knew they were doing wrong and they weren't just grossly incompetent. You would have to prove that the individual provided information they knew to be false. In that case there could be criminal and/or civil penalties against the individual. For gross incompetence the best you can get is a firing.

Usually its the supervisor or manager who takes the heat.

In example 1 you could get an incompetence reprimand.

In example 2 the superior would take the heat. Any evidence gathered without the warrant would be thrown out of court.

In example 3 this goes back to a WWII law. There was fear that some companies supplying the military might go bankrupt. The economy was not very good in the 1940s. So congress passed a law saying that the federal government could be legally overcharged in order to prevent bankruptcy in a critical supplier. The law was not removed from the books until the 1980s and was widely abused. But the abuse was legal.

In example 4 the judge can't pass sentence until the jury gives a verdict. Are you going to sue the jury? Mike Nifong did go to jail for withholding exculpatory evidence in the Duke lacross rape case.

Answer 8

and a president divides a nation for personal monetary gain

Answer 9

Your points are good and make sense but are not feasible.  The IRS employee is wrong and can be punished for his actions.  The DEA agent can not be held accountable because of how the system works, however; his Superior's who knew there was know warrant have themselves committed a crime and can be arrested and prosecuted.  The Military bean counter has not committed a crime because the purchase is being made under a contract.  He is morally bound to report the over pricing to his superiors for appropriate action.  You can't touch the judge.

Answer 10

I didnt read the whole thing but if they are personally relidabile  for the froud then they should be liabile!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!