Hacker News Reader

It was too risky. My boss was scummy and even though I had documentation about my hours being edited he would have fought it and we'd go to court and at that point it'd be a crap shoot. If I remember right, the prison time was five years and there is no parole with federal sentences.

To prevent this situation the peons should be given the benefit of the doubt by the courts.

In this case, either (1) the peon was lying about reported hours, the boss didn't notice, and then the peon reported himself... or (2) everything happened just like you said.

Aren't there bounties for reporting things like this? At the very least winning should include reimbursement for legal expenses.

They do get the benefit of the doubt, but when you're a defendant in a criminal trial, simply having the benefit of the doubt on your side will not mean that you're going to have a great experience with it.

All your going to end up with this type of cases is:

* Years of stress

* Years of financial losses because lawyers are not cheap. And no matter how well you are innocent, not having a lawyer is guaranteed that you will fail.

* Years of time wasting.

And for what? The government maybe sentencing a guy for fraud. When its like 90%+ he will strike a sweetheart deal with the prosecutor.

Even worse in a case like this where its almost your word vs the boss his word. Yea, you can be the guy that ends up living under a bridge while the CEO laughs his way to the bank, being able to pin it on you.

Its already difficult with some proof... Dealing with this type of fraud case reporting, is easier when your not in the spotlight of the crime, and then reporting it. But if your unwilling part of it, few people want their neck on the line.

Easier to say than do.

Now that you know, do you feel culpable?

He just knows that someone on HN who is not using their real name has described witnessing government fraud at some unspecified point in the past and reporting it to the head of the project. He doesn't have any information about where it occurred other than probably the United States.

He's not really in a position to act usefully on this information, so had no reason to feel any culpability for not acting. It is only an interesting question when put to people were in a position where they had to make a choice.

He can report the incident to digital crimes unit who can subpoena HN/YC for identity of the poster, and then they can take it from there.

There is always something you can do — whether you are going to bother is an altogether a different matter.

Your really think this would be investigated? An uncorroborated story shared on online forum by an anonymous poster? You really think highly of authority, don’t you?

Nope, I do not: but if someone is riding the moral high horse, start with themselves ;)

I'm supposed to dox this person or something? What are you asking exactly?

If you don’t have a duty to report, you don’t have a duty to report. You can’t predict what government prosecutors will do. If they start investigating and it turns out for whatever reason they can’t pin it on the boss, they could have pinned if on OP.

Think about it logically. If you’re the prosecutor, the guy whose time is fraudulent is presumptively the criminal. It could very well be that he was actually the one who was engaged in the fraud, but went to the authorities to protect himself by making it look like his boss did it.

Yours is unfortunately the attitude which breeds corruption, and also the attitude of the majority of people. "Not my problem", "not my duty", "covering my own ass", "not getting into trouble" and so on. The reptilian minded people like OPs boss love having you guys around, because they can't do their unethical schemes just by themselves, and you won't make a fuss.

As for the prosecutor; he is first and foremost interested in where the money went. If fraudulent hours didn't give OP an extra paycheck boost, then that money went somewhere else.

Look, you want people to get involved? Then it needs to be safe to do so. Recent history has demonstrated that whistleblowers have no such assurance. They risk damage to their reputation and future employment prospects; some even end up forced out their career of choice. This is how we reward them, and you expect people to just step up and fall on those swords?

Other commenters have pointed out that our justice system also lacks any means to determine how a particular case will play out. Personally, I would do everything in my power to avoid entanglement with the government, in any way shape or form. I am literally terrified of going to court for any reason, because Truth and Justice no longer have any place there; no, the Law sucks all the oxygen out of the room. If you think otherwise, then I would wager that you have never been through that system.

> Okay… do you not feel culpable at some point?

1. No mens rea.

2. He did what was expected of him.

3. You're always free to break into prison if you find yourself in his position, but you might discover yourself sitting in a pool of shit that was not of your own making.

4. Do you really want the parent poster to face the possibility of criminal prosecution, because his scumbag boss convinces the DOJ that the parent poster were the one fucking with the hours, and tried to pin it on him?

Do people really have a duty to fix every wrong in the world? He reported it to the project head, and resigned. He ensured he wasn't a part of the situation.

I don't think you have to be a full saint to fulfil your moral obligations. He ensured he wasn't implicitly participating and reported it to someone who had a responsibility to investigate/do something about it. That is a reasonable amount of effort to rectify the situation in my opinion.

> Yes I know it’s not all that rare, BECAUSE people can’t be bothered to blow the whistle.

The person you are responding to did "blow the whistle". They reported it to the project head. That is blowing the whistle.

They didn't blow the whistle though, not really.

Especially not when gp said that they expected the department head to brush it under the rug. If reporting things "up the chain of command" was really expected to root corruption out, and this fraud is 100% a form of corruption, then whistle blowing simply wouldn't be needed.

They covered their own ass, which is fine, in that later the head can't say they didn't know about it. But they didn't blow the whistle.

Whistleblowers get worse punishments than the criminals they report on.

Absolutely not. Honor does not pay the mortgage. Whistleblowers have no real protection, despite laws saying they should. If you blow that whistle, you will be retaliated against, guaranteed.

What you know and what you can prove are different things.

I think most people would blow the whistle if they had evidence of personal-enrichment fraud. Suspecting that incentives are producing strange outcomes is one thing; accusing specific people of criminal conduct is quite another.

Hilariously, in the one case I heard about where an MD was eventually fired for taking kickbacks from contractors, the department then struggled to recruit competent staff. It turned out he had only been skimming from people who could actually do the job.

hell no! CYA and See'ya! You should try to avoid anything to do with government investigations.

Sure, you go first. Make sure your work is highly visible and regulated for extra challenge mode.

Edit: I'll do you one better, there may be a reason that academics and others up/downstream from you gave an OK. They might even receive fees, and play 100% dumb when you try to blow a whistle! Just spitballing here.