Whistleblower attorneys Renée Brooker and Eva Gunasekera answer questions about the False Claims Act, government program fraud, and how to be a whistleblower. One of the main questions often asked is what kinds of hard evidence should a whistleblower have in order to convince both an attorney to take their case, and the Department of Justice to investigate. Read on to understand what kinds of proof can help you build the strongest case possible as a whistleblower.
The word of a whistleblower is not enough to launch a full investigation into alleged fraud. As Gunasekera put it, “when a person observes what they believe is illegal activity, they think that their word is sufficient…because it is such an eye-opening experience that they went through at their former employer. Oftentimes, they have been retaliated against because they did raise their hand about these concerns. To the whistleblower, that should be evidence enough that what they were saying was truthful. While it is helpful evidence, that standing alone is not sufficient for the DOJ to open an investigation.”
Accusing a company of fraud against the government is a big undertaking. In order to launch a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into ongoing or past fraud, whistleblowers will need to provide some kind of evidence to convince the DOJ to use the full might of the subpoena.
“In a fraud case, we’re talking about...
Professional rivalry and office politics were the driving forces behind the "false" sexual harassment and conversion allegations levelled against Tata Consulting Services (TCS) employee Raza Rafiq...