Associated Press
WASHINGTON — A longtime CIA officer wrongly suspected by the FBI during their hunt to identify Russian spy Robert Hanssen has returned to work, the CIA confirmed Friday.
The officer, who conducts undercover work and therefore was not identified, spent 18 months on paid leave during the investigation, although he had passed a series of polygraph tests and some officials believed the evidence against him was marginal.
He started back at work about three months ago.
"As far as we’re concerned, he’s a productive part of the workforce," CIA spokesman Bill Harlow said.
The heat went off the officer when FBI investigators found the mole in their own backyard. On Feb. 18, the FBI arrested veteran counterintelligence officer Robert Hanssen on espionage charges. Hanssen has confessed to spying for Moscow for 15 years and is being interrogated by the FBI, which has been heavily criticized for failing to find him sooner. He is due to be sentenced in January.
The CIA officer described his ordeal to The New York Times. The newspaper reported today that the man had a remarkable amount of superficial similarities to Hanssen — he once lived down the street from Hanssen, was about the same age, and even jogged in the park where Hanssen would leave materials for the KGB to recover. Some of those similarities initially led investigators to the CIA man.
Both the officer and Hanssen had knowledge of the same cases, including an investigation of a former State Department official who was suspected of spying for the Soviet Union. Counterintelligence agents believe the man was tipped off by the KGB that he was under suspicion, leading investigators to believe they had a mole in their midst, the Times reported.
In 1999, counterintelligence agents interrogated the CIA officer, and he lost his access to CIA headquarters and was put on paid leave.
Copyright ©2001 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
