According to her lawyer, a female CIA trainee who is suing the organisation for intimidation and sexual assault alleges she was fired. The incident allegedly occurred in a stairway at CIA headquarters in 2022.
Her attorney characterised the firing as “clear retaliation for her protected whistleblower statements to law enforcement, Congress and the IG (Inspector General) as a sex assault victim” in an email she sent to members of the House Intelligence Committee, who have been hearing from alleged CIA sexual assault victims.
The attorney’s assertion was deemed “factually inaccurate” by CIA spokesperson Tammy Thorp in a statement.
“Let me state it clearly: the CIA has zero tolerance for sexual assault, harassment, or retaliation against whistleblowers,” Thorp stated.
Following her testimony before the House Intelligence Committee regarding her assault, the unidentified trainee allegedly failed the agency’s demanding training programme for clandestine officers, which is jokingly referred to as “The Farm,” according to her lawyer, Kevin Carroll. She was subsequently given a 90-day notice to either find another position within the agency or face termination. According to him, she was let go on Monday as she couldn’t get another job.
Carroll claims that the mentee is a fluent multilingual project manager with extensive experience in Russia and Ukraine.
Regarding claims about the CIA’s demanding training programme, Thorp stated: “As you would expect, the CIA employs consistent procedures to guarantee the equitable and fair treatment of each officer undergoing training.”
Accusing the agency of improperly intervening on favour of her attacker in his criminal trial last year, the trainee filed a federal civil rights case in Virginia four months prior to her termination.
The CIA’s handling of instances involving sexual harassment and assault is under continued scrutiny on Capitol Hill, which is why the lawsuit is timely. After multiple women testified before congressional intelligence committees last year, alleging that their claims of sexual assault were “grossly mishandled,” the CIA inspector general launched a “special review” into the matter.
The attack itself was already prosecuted in Fairfax County General District Court; the victim’s claim challenges the CIA’s response to her first report and subsequent attempts to obtain redress.
The victim’s criminal defence team allegedly had access to her private workplace instant communications, which the agency published inappropriately. The victim believes that these messages were meant to fraudulently portray her as having an adulterous affair with another coworker.
Claiming that the victim’s right to privacy was violated and that the CIA was trying to intimidate her into not testifying, the victim is suing the court for the IMs, claiming that they were not given to the court as a consequence of a court-ordered subpoena or a request from law enforcement.
Citing ongoing litigation, a CIA spokesperson at the time declined to divulge the case’s facts.”The CIA is committed to upholding the law and protecting the privacy of our officers.”
Carroll stated that the legal complaint is currently undergoing settlement talks, but that the outcome of these talks is uncertain.
