Did Daniel D. Cutler, Esq. Distribute Illegal Drugs at Hogan & Hartson?

In March 1987 I worked as an agency-supplied temporary employee in the Computer Applications Department (CAD) at the DC law firm of Hogan & Hartson. My fellow employees in CAD worked in an office suite across the street from the firm's main office on 815 Connecticut Avenue, the so called "I Street Office." About a month earlier (February 12, 1987), the CAD supervisor Sheryl Ferguson announced to employees that she was leaving the firm. Shortly thereafter the department devolved into an interpersonal cesspool.

On an afternoon in March 1987 I was working in my office alone, behind a closed door. I could hear my coworkers talking about marijuana. At some point Daniel D. Cutler, Esq. -- one of my coworkers -- left the office, and it became quiet in the office. Some time later, Daniel Cutler returned. I heard him say: "It's not hard to get; they sell it on the street." There was a lot of loud carrying on in the office after Daniel Cutler returned. My "idea of reference," see Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998) (an employer may conclude that the psychiatric disorder "ideas of reference" renders an employee unfit for employment), was that Daniel Cutler had purchased marijuana on the street and proceeded to distribute the drug to his coworkers on Hogan & Hartson's premises. Craig W. Dye was not present at that time; I believe he was working at the firm's main office on Connecticut Avenue.

January 3, 1998
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
#136
Washington, DC 20008-4530

Benjamin A. Perillo
Acting Deputy Assistant
Administrator
Drug Enforcement Administration
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20537

Dear Mr. Perillo:

I am an attorney, and am currently involved in a job search.

During the period September 1985 to February 1988 I was employed in the Washington, DC office of the law firm of Hogan & Hartson, in the capacity of an agency-supplied temporary employee, assigned to the firm's Computer Applications Department.

In about March or April 1987 I became privy to information relating to the possible purchase by an employee of Hogan of a single quantity of illegal drugs and his subsequent distribution of same to other Hogan employees in the Computer Applications Department, during working hours, on the firm's premises. During that time period the Department was supervised by an interim supervisor, Freddie K. Rios, who is now employed by the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. I have no reason to believe that Freddie K. Rios was aware of this incident.

The employees in question were at that time employed on a document production task for the firm's client Chrysler Corporation, immediately supervised by attorney David A. Kikel, Esq. (202 637 5732). The client's billing partner was James A. Hourihan, Esq. (202 637 6544).

Contemporaneous documentation of my suspicions regarding the above incident is a humorous memo that I prepared and posted in the office suite to which the employees were assigned. A copy of that document is now in the custody of the U.S. Secret Service, Washington Field Office (Phillip C. Leadroot, S.A.)

At the time of the incident the employees were assigned to temporary office space that was located in an office building across the street from the firm's central site at 815 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, DC: the so-called "I Street" annex. The employees were unsupervised at that location.

I recall that in about May 1987 I related details regarding this incident to the Department's secretary, Laura Mayo. Laura Mayo told me, at about that time, that the Department's data base administrator, Esperanza ("Espe") Rebollar herself seemed to suffer from a chemical (alcohol) dependency, and that on one occasion Rebollar arrived at work in an apparent inebriated state. Laura Mayo showed me the draft version of a letter she had written and planned to submit to Freddie K. Rios that detailed Mayo's concerns about and perceptions of Rebollar's professional conduct.

Details regarding the drug incident are contained in a letter that I wrote and submitted in October 1992 to the George Washington University Medical Center Department of Psychiatry (Napoleon Cuenco, M.D.) in connection with my psychiatric treatment at that institution. In about December 1993 I forwarded a copy of that letter, together with several other letters relating to my psychotherapeutic treatment, to the U.S. Social Security Administration (claim no. xxx-xx-xxxx). I no longer have a copy of that letter.

My current dilemma is as follows. I plan to submit a job inquiry to the Chrysler Corporation's legal department. It has been a life-long dream of mine to work as an attorney for the Chrysler Corporation. I fear that if I am hired by Chrysler but fail to disclose information relating to the above incident, that failure to disclose could jeopardize my employment should Chrysler subsequently learn of the incident. Yet if I disclose the incident to Chrysler in connection with my job inquiry I may expose myself to possible defamation liability or even criminal liability relating to the crime of extortion. Also, Hogan, like all law firms, has strict policies relating to disclosure of client names and client information. See e.g. memorandum dated August 7, 1986 from The Executive Committee to All Hogan Personnel re: Confidential Information and Trading in Securities: although in this case I would be revealing to the client itself information regarding the possible criminal conduct of individuals employed by the client's legal representative.

May I request that the Justice Department provide me guidance on how to proceed in this matter?

You may want to review this matter with Hogan's managing partner Bob Glen Odle at 202 637 5639.

Sincerely,

Gary Freedman