FBI Did Not Review Witnesses Suggested By Ramirez, Her Attorney Says

WASHINGTON, DC - Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on Thursday September 6, 2018. (Photo by Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
WASHINGTON, DC - Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on Thursday September 6, 2018. (Photo by Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

In conducting a new background investigation into sexual misconduct claims against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, the FBI did not interview witnesses suggested by accuser Deborah Ramirez, her attorney revealed in a letter sent to FBI Director Christopher Wray on Thursday morning.

The letter, which came after the FBI concluded its latest background investigation into Kavanaugh, calls out the FBI for failing to attempt to corroborate the claims made by Ramirez.

Ramirez accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a gathering in college, and the FBI interviewed her about her account last week, according to a letter from the attorney representing Ramirez, William Pittard.

In the letter, Pittard wrote that Ramirez named several people who learned of the incident during her FBI interview. The letter includes statements from several people who learned of the alleged incident around the time it occurred at Yale University, including a declaration from a new potential witness.

Richard Oh, who attended Yale at the same time Ramirez and Kavanaugh were students there, wrote in the declaration that he recalled a female student telling him that “what she initially thought was a plastic penis was exhibited, but she later realized it was a male student’s exposed penis.” Oh said he contacted the FBI but that nobody from the bureau tried to schedule an interview with him.

In his letter, Pittard criticized the FBI for failing to contact more potential witnesses.

“There may be many additional witnesses who could offer still further corroboration (if any additional corroboration were needed, which it is not). But we likely never will know, given that your agents were barred from investigating,” Pittard said.

Read the letter:

Dear Reader,

When we asked recently what makes TPM different from other outlets, readers cited factors like honesty, curiosity, transparency, and our vibrant community. They also pointed to our ability to report on important stories and trends long before they are picked up by mainstream outlets; our ability to contextualize information within the arc of history; and our focus on the real-world consequences of the news.

Our unique approach to reporting and presenting the news, however, wouldn’t be possible without our readers’ support. That’s not just marketing speak, it’s true: our work would literally not be possible without readers deciding to become members. Not only does member support account for more than 80% of TPM’s revenue, our members have helped us build an engaged and informed community. Many of our best stories were born from reader tips and valuable member feedback.

We do what other news outlets can’t or won’t do because our members’ support gives us real independence.

If you enjoy reading TPM and value what we do, become a member today.

Sincerely,
TPM Staff
Latest Dc
Comments
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Investigations Desk:
Reporters:
Newswriters:
Director of Audience:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: