Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
JOHN THOMAS BURCH,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Criminal No. 17-099 (KBJ)

GOVERNMENT’S MEMORANDUM IN AID OF SENTENCING
The United States, by and through its attorney, the United States Attorney for the District
of Columbia, respectfully provides the following memorandum in aid of sentencing. For the
reasons set forth below, the government recommends a sentence of six months of imprisonment
and six months of home detention.
I.

Procedural Background

On June 21, 2017, the defendant, John Thomas Burch, waived indictment and pleaded guilty
to a one count Information charging Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343).
II.

Factual Background

This crime arose from the defendant’s misuse of money belonging to the National Vietnam
Veterans Foundation, Inc. (“NVVF”), a nonprofit charity formed in the District of Columbia.
Although, according to its 2014 Annual Report, the goals of NVVF were “to engage in
programs, projects and activities that benefit United States Veterans and their families,” little of
the raised funds went for that purpose. In filings with the Internal Revenue Service, NVVF
reported that fundraising expenses captured the vast majority of the donors’ money – in 2012
$4,489,637 was raised and $3,968,538 went to the fundraisers; in 2013 $6,835,659 was raised

1

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 2 of 10

and $6,087,330 went to the fundraisers; in 2014 $8,643,900 was raised and $7,736,172 went to
the fundraisers, for an average rate to the fundraiser of 89%. 1
In November 2016, the Office of the Attorney General for the State of New York (“OAG –
NY”) reached an agreement with the defendant to settle a civil matter regarding the NVVF. In
the agreed upon “Assurance of Discontinuance,” the OAG – NY found that NVVF misused the
charity’s money due to the large percentage of donations that went to pay the fundraisers. They
also found that the defendant engaged in abuse, mismanagement, and misspending. They cited
the defendant’s receipt of a salary from the charity (in addition to his full time job at the
Department of Veteran’s Affairs) and NVVF’s payment “reimbursing [the defendant] for nearly
every expense he incurred,” including insurance, pharmaceutical and medical expenses,
conference fees, travel, parking of two vehicles, telephone, internet, and security for the
defendant’s home. The OAG – NY also found mismanagement with the use of NVVF money to
pay the defendant’s family member and former NVVF board members, including underwriting
studies which were never released to the public and had no apparent use in the veteran
community. As part of its findings, the OAG – NY also cited the defendant’s abuse of the
Emergency Assistance Fund, which is the sole basis for the criminal charge in this case. The
defendant agreed with OAG – NY’s Assurance of Discontinuance, paying $100,000 to the State
of New York, returning to NVVF his severance payment of approximately $5,300, and agreeing
to disbarment from non-profits.
The defendant also issued a written apology to the Veterans of the Vietnam War, admitting
his role, “I was founder, President and Chairman of the Board of the National Vietnam Veterans

1

NVVF disclosed these numbers to the Internal Revenue Service, and added to their donor solicitations, “a very
significant portion of your contribution will be utilized to help continue our ongoing public awareness and
fundraising program.”

2

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 3 of 10

Foundation,” and to the donors, “this letter is my apology to the millions of individuals that
donated to the National Vietnam Veterans Foundation.” The defendant recognized that “as
donors, you put your trust in me to make sure your donations helped veterans, not to pay
professional fundraisers and finance my personal entertainment pursuits.” Finally, the defendant
admitted the misspent donations, “about 90% of your money went to our fundraisers; that is
unacceptable. Much of the rest was not spent in the manner that we described when we solicited
money from you.”
Subsequently, the defendant pleaded guilty to wire fraud regarding his misappropriation of
the Emergency Assistance Program. The program accounted for tens of thousands of dollars of
NVVF’s operating expenses annually from 2012 through 2016, and, given the paucity of money
left over after paying the fundraisers’ / defendant’s “expenses,” these funds amounted to a not
insignificant portion of NVVF’s available resources to truly assist veterans and their families. In
the August 2013 Minutes of the NVVF board of directors meeting, the “chairman” (the
defendant) described the Emergency Assistance Program as “a discretionary program run by him
as President of the Foundation,” with payments generally ranging from $100 to $250, to
“Veteran family members with small children who are in chronic destitute circumstances.” Only
in exceptional circumstances were “small grants [] given to destitute individuals without close
Veteran ties.”
Despite the defendant’s assurances to NVVF’s Board of Directors, the defendant used the
Emergency Assistance Program to give thousands of dollars to young women who often were
engaged in personal and intimate relationships with him. Two women received more than 100
payments from the defendant, and one received in excess of $30,000. Five women received
more than $10,000. None of the women were Vietnam War veterans (all were born significantly

3

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 4 of 10

after the war ended), and had only the most tenuous ties to any veteran. In addition to money he
gave these women, the defendant submitted false expense reports claiming reimbursements for
business lodging, travel, and meals, when in reality he spent the money on personal visits to
“gentlemen’s clubs,” restaurants, and hotels in Baltimore. The total amount of loss is $149,317.
III.

Government’s Position on Sentencing

As set forth above, the government recommends a sentence of six months of imprisonment
and six months of home detention.
A. Sentencing Guidelines Calculation
In the plea agreement (ECF Docket #2), the parties agreed as to the following sentencing
guideline calculation:
U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1

Base Offense Level

7

U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(E)

Specific Offense Characteristics – loss
between $95,000 and $150,000

8

Acceptance of Responsibility

(-2)
Total 13 2

B. The Factors Under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
1. Need for the Sentence to Reflect the Seriousness of the Offense
For over 4 ½ years (January 2012 to August 2016), the defendant siphoned off nearly
$150,000 of scarce charity funds designated to assist needy veterans. Yet, during this same time
period, the defendant was himself employed receiving a six-figure salary from the Veteran’s
Administration as a GS-15 level employee. From 2012 to 2015, the defendant received between

2

In the draft Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”), the Probation Officer assigned two additional points for
abuse of position of trust pursuant to USSG § 3B1.3. (The final PSR will be completed after the deadline for the
parties’ sentencing memoranda.) If the Court accepts the Probation Officer’s analysis, the resulting Offense Level
will be greater than 16. In such a case, the government will move for a third point reduction pursuant to USSG
§ 3E1.1(b).

4

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 5 of 10

$125,000 to $134,000 from the VA, and an additional average yearly salary from NVVF of
$55,000 (which was apart from NVVF’s payment of the defendant’s insurance, utilities, parking,
and travel expenses, referenced by the OAG – NY). (See also PSR at ¶ 86 for defendant’s
income between 2014 and 2016.) Making upwards of almost $200,000 per year, the defendant
made the choice to steal money from a charity for his own personal gratification. 3
Law enforcement agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation have interviewed women
who received the NVVF money from the defendant. Virtually all of these women reported that
they met the defendant while they were employed as dancers at gentlemen’s clubs in Baltimore.
According to the women, the defendant was well-known to the dancers and bouncers at the clubs
(the women, who did not have any known associations with each other, described similar habits
and patterns of the defendant). The women were also forthcoming about the nature of their
relationship with the defendant and the purpose of his payment of money to them. The following
are excerpts from FBI memoranda of interviews (women’s names and identifying information
are anonymized):
BURCH paid INDIVIDUAL to have sex with him, though BURCH
never explicitly stated he was paying for sex. BURCH was careful to say
he was providing her money to help her out or something similar, but
INDIVIDUAL understood he was paying her for sex. INDIVIDUAL
liked the money she received from BURCH. BURCH had sex with
INDIVIDUAL at the Renaissance Marriott hotel in Baltimore.
INDIVIDUAL did have a sexual physical relationship with
BURCH at the RENAISSANCE HOTEL. . . . INDIVIDUAL
received a check from BURCH during this meeting.
INDIVIDUAL had approximately xxx or xxx such meetings
during which BURCH provided her checks. BURCH always said
the money was for something other than sex but INDIVIDUAL
knew she was being paid for sex.

3

The government takes issue with the defendant’s statement that due to his pending criminal conviction, he “lost all
employment.” PSR at ¶ 25. According to the VA’s Office of Inspector General, the defendant retired from his GS15 position at the VA, and is currently receiving government employment pension benefits.

5

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 6 of 10

INDIVIDUAL engaged in sexual activity with BURCH, around
seven to ten times.
BURCH provided INDIVIDUAL “good money” when he “sat with
her” at the clubs.
Other girls were also getting WESTERN UNION funds from BURCH as
BURCH was paying for prostitution. . . . BURCH had sex with multiple
people in his ROLLS ROYCE. 4
These women were young (although all over the age of 18) and financially fragile. Many
were vulnerable, in difficult periods in their lives, and the defendant’s attentions were not
particularly beneficial. One woman told law enforcement that the defendant “had a temper and
could sometimes get very angry,” while another called the defendant a “dirty old man who acted
nice and sweet but was nasty and violent.” One woman’s father referred to the defendant as a
“predator” who “baited” young women, who were struggling financially, into performing sexual
favors for him in exchange for money.
The defendant targeted women who had some, however nebulous, connections with
veterans. These relatives might have been a great-uncle, grandfather, or remote cousin, and the
woman may not have known the details or even the branch in which the relative served, but the
connection would be sufficient, at least to the defendant, to justify paying out NVVF money. To
further justify the payments, the defendant instructed the women to send letters to the NVVF,
coached them on what to say, and at times, drafted the emails himself to ensure that the wording
would not raise suspicion at the NVVF.
In addition to paying the women themselves, the defendant submitted claims to NVVF
for reimbursements to pay for the hotel, meals, and clubs, including over $13,000 at the

4

These inserts are summaries from Federal Bureau of Investigation reports. In total, six women admitted to the FBI
that the defendant gave them money in exchange for sex. NVVF and third-party documents confirmed that the
women received NVVF funds.

6

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 7 of 10

Baltimore Renaissance Hotel and over $23,000 at establishments known to be gentlemen’s clubs.
In order to conceal his crime, the defendant falsified the expense reports. For example, during
one June 2012 night at the Renaissance Hotel and the preceding evening spent at two Baltimore
strip clubs, the defendant claimed over $780 expenses for “work on homeless veteran issues.”
The defendant’s crime is serious, requiring a sentence of some incarceration which will
be seen as reflective of the seriousness of the crime.
2. Need for the Sentence to Promote Respect for the Law
Once the OAG – NY initiated its investigation, the defendant attempted to distance himself
from the crime. He brought in various women to his attorney’s office to contradict the
allegations of mismanagement and misuse of the Emergency Assistance Payment program.
These women understood the defendant was asking them to lie about the nature of their
relationship, and did so. The defendant paid $400 to a woman, who understood that he was
paying her for creating a false sworn statement, and paid a $1,000 to another woman after she
spoke to his attorney. The defendant also treated a woman to lunch following her meeting at the
lawyer’s office; this woman reported to the FBI that she was “sorry she lied to BURCH’s
attorneys.” The defendant’s lack of remorse is evident by his actions in attempting to conceal
the severity of his conduct by further manipulating the same young women to misrepresent the
nature of the payments and relationship with the defendant.
3. Need to Afford Adequate Deterrence to Criminal Conduct
Charitable giving is both important to the donor and crucial for the recipient. For those
who are entrusted with donations of private citizens, financial imprudence is inexcusable and
detrimental to society. By making false statements on expense reports and hiding his criminal
activities, the defendant prevented NVVF from appropriately allocating the donations they

7

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 8 of 10

received towards their stated mission of aiding veterans, and particularly Vietnam veterans.
Stealing from the Emergency Assistance Program deprived compassionate donors of their
intended use of approximately $150,000 of donations, and, more significantly, deprived needy
veterans and their families of the benefit of the charity dollars.
The harm the defendant visited upon NVVF and its intended beneficiaries is best understood
by an example: According to OAG – NY, during the time in question, veterans applied for
emergency assistance from NVVF but were turned away or given only a nominal amount of
assistance. They cite the case of a veteran who requested rental assistance in May 2015 for his
family, which included a five-year-old daughter. The veteran had been unable to secure
employment and petitioned NVVF for help. NVVF gave him only $250, saying that “with the
current capacity of our organization and the number of requests we receive, the most we are able
to give at this time is 250 toward your rent.” Yet the next month, June 2015, the defendant
reimbursed himself for $619 he spent at the Renaissance hotel in Baltimore, 5 $1,341 at known
Baltimore strip clubs, and an additional $1,224 for meals, for a total of $3,184.00 in one month.
Apparently, the capacity of NVVF to help the unemployed veteran’s family with his monthly
rent dwindled when compared with the importance of paying the defendant.
A sentence including some period of incarceration provides deterrence to others who find
themselves in positions of determining the best use of charitable dollars.
IV.

Forfeiture and Fines

The parties agreed that the amount of forfeiture due from the defendant is $75,000 pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c). At the plea hearing, the defendant tendered
a cashier’s check for $75,000, which will satisfy the forfeiture.

5

Given that the defendant lives in Alexandria, it is unclear why the defendant had any legitimate reason to stay at
the Baltimore Renaissance Hotel.

8

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 9 of 10

The Court will also determine whether, and to what extent, to impose a fine. The
government takes no position on the issue of a fine.
V.

Restitution

The victim in the case, NVVF, has been disbanded. Given the thousands of individuals who
had donated to the NVVF during its existence, and the impracticability of providing restitution
such a large number of victims, the government submits that mandatory restitution should not
apply in this case. See 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(c)(3)(A).
CONCLUSION
For the reasons described above, the government’s recommended sentence of six months
of incarceration and six months of home detention reflects the seriousness of the offense,
promotes respect for the law, provides just punishment for the offense, affords adequate
deterrence, and protects the public from further crimes of the defendant as set forth in18 U.S.C. §
3553(a). The government also requests that the Court order the defendant to serve 250 hours of
community service with charities specializing in issues relating to homeless veterans.

Respectfully submitted,
CHANNING D. PHILLIPS
United States Attorney
for the District of Columbia

By:

9

_______/s/____________________
VIRGINIA CHEATHAM
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Virginia.cheatham@usdoj.gov
Bar No. 411980
555 4th Street, N.W. Room 5836
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 252-7820

 Case 1:17-cr-00099-KBJ Document 10 Filed 09/21/17 Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on September 21, 2017, a copy of the foregoing Sentencing
Memorandum was served via electronic case filing to counsel for the defendant.

________/s/_____________________
Virginia Cheatham
Assistant U.S. Attorney

10