Case 1:18-cr-00089-TSE Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 495

tWOPEN&URT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Alexandria Division

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V.

Criminal No. l:18-cr-89

(Hon. T. S. Ellis III)
JERRY CHUN SHING LEE,
Defendant.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The United States and the defendant, JERRY CHUN SHING LEE (hereinafter,

"the defendant"), agree that at trial, the United States would have proven the following
facts beyond a reasonable doubt with admissible and credible evidence:

1.

From on or about April 26,2010 to on or about January 15, 2018,in the

Eastem District of Virginia and elsewhere,including locations ojutside ofthe jurisdiction
ofany particular state or district, the defendant did unlawfully and knowingly conspire
with others to communicate, deliver, and transmit to a foreign government, to wit: the

Government ofthe People's Republic of China("PRC"),and representatives, officers,

and agents thereof, directly and indirectly, documents, writings and information relating
to the national defense ofthe United States, with the intent and reason to believe that

such documents, writings and information were to be used to the injury ofthe United
States and to the advantage ofa foreign government, namely,the Government ofthe
PRC.

2.

The defendant is a naturalized United States citizen who principally

resided in Hong Kong during the timeffame ofthe conspiracy. He entered duty with the

ICT COURT
RGINIA

 Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 2 of 9 PagelD# 496

Central Intelligence Agency in 1994. The headquarters are in Langley,
Virginia, which is within the Eastern District of Virginia. As a CIA case of?cer, the
defendant worked in various overseas locations, including China.

3. In the course of his employment with the CIA, the defendant obtained and
maintained a Top Secret security clearance. In addition to his Top Secret security
clearance, the defendant also obtained and maintained access to Sensitive
Compartmented Information The US. government entrusted the defendant
with access to sensitive government materials, including classi?ed documents, materials,
and information related to the national defense that were closely held by the government.

4. The defendant resigned from the CIA in July 2007.

5. On July 13, 2007, prior to leaving government service, the defendant
signed a CIA security exit form that contained the following language: give my
assurance that there is no classi?ed material in my possession, custody, or control at this
time.? The CIA terminated the defendant?s security clearance upon his departure from
government service.

6. In or about July 2007, the defendant began working in Hong Kong for a
large international tobacco company. This company terminated the defendant in or
about June 2009. He continued to receive salary payments from it until in or about May
2010.

7. In or about June 2009, the defendant and a business associate began
discussing the formation of a new business. This business associate was a former Hong
Kong police officer, who, as the defendant well knew, had close ties to the 

Ministry of State Security The M88 is a PRC intelligence service that handles

Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 3 of 9 Page D# 497

civilian intelligence collection and is responsible for counter-intelligence and foreign
intelligence, as well as political security within the PRC. The stated purpose of the
company was to serve as an intermediary between foreign tobacco companies and
China?s State Tobacco Monopoly Administration 

8. On April 13, 2010, while in Hong Kong, the defendant applied online to
the CIA for re-employment.

9. On April 26, 2010, the defendant and the business associate traveled from
Hong Kong to Shenzhen, China to attend a private dinner. Present at the dinner were
persons whom the defendant understood to be MSS Chinese intelligence officers 
During the dinner, the Chinese 105 excused the defendant?s business associate and then
offered to compensate the defendant in exchange for national defense information from
his time as a CIA case of?cer. The 103 told the defendant that they had prepared a gift
of $100,000 cash and that they would take care of him ?for life? in exchange for his
cooperation.

10. On May 11, 2010, while overseas, the defendant met with a former CIA
colleague and reported that he had been approached by two 103 at a conference, which
was false. The defendant also failed to reveal the 105? request for information as well as
their offers to give him $100,000 and take care of him for life.

1 l. Sometime in or about May 2010, the defendant began receiving a series
of written requests for information (taskings) from the 103. The majority of the taskings
asked the defendant to reveal sensitive information about the CIA, including national

defense information. The taskings continued into at least 2011.

Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 4 of 9 PagelD# 498

a. During 2012, the defendant had a series of interviews with the CIA. All
of these interviews occurred within the Eastern District of Virginia.
Throughout these interviews, in response to questions about what the
[05 had wanted from him, the defendant intentionally failed to disclose
that he had received taskings from the 105.

b. In May 2013, during an interview with Special Agents of the FBI, the
defendant admitted that he had received taskings. He described the
taskings but stated that he had not kept the written requests because they
would tend to incriminate him.

12. On May 14, 2010, the defendant made or caused to be made into his
personal bank account in Hong Kong a cash deposit of $138,000 HKD (approximately
$17,468 USD). This would be the first of hundreds of thousands of dollars (USD
equivalent) in cash deposits the defendant made or caused to be made into his personal
HSBC account from this date through December 2013. Throughout the year prior to this
initial cash deposit on May 14, 2010, the defendant had not made any comparable cash
deposits into this HSBC account.

13. On May 26, 2010, in Hong Kong, the defendant created on his laptop
computer a document that described, inter alia, certain locations to which the CIA would
assign of?cers with certain identified experience, as well as the particular location and
timeframe of a sensitive CIA operation. After the defendant created this document, he
transferred it on an unknown date from his laptop to a thumb drive.

a. On August 13, 2012, the FBI conducted a court-authorized search of a

hotel room in Honolulu, Hawaii registered in the defendant?s name.

Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 5 of 9 PagelD# 499

The defendant was renting this hotel room while relocating with his
family from Hong Kong to the Eastern District of Virginia. The search
revealed that the defendant possessed the thumb drive within his
personal luggage. The FBI forensically imaged the thumb drive and
later located the document in the unallocated space of the thumb drive,
meaning that it had been deleted.

b. When confronted with this document by Special Agents of the FBI
during an interview on May 22, 2013, the defendant falsely denied that
he possessed it, claimed not to know who created it, and denied knowing
why it would have been on his computer. He also denied deleting the
document.

0. In a subsequent FBI interview on May 28, 2013, the defendant admitted
that he created the document in response to two taskings from the 
and transferred it to a thumb drive. He also said he thought about
giving it to the 103 but never did. A US. government of?cial with
original classi?cation authority later determined that the information the
defendant included in this document was national defense information of
the United States that was classi?ed at the Secret level.

14. In or about June 2010, the defendant and his business associate registered
a company, FTM International Bank records later revealed that FTM had g;

minimis legitimate business. By in or about December 201 1, the defendant had sold his

 

stake in TM for a nominal sum Hong Kong Dollar per share).

Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 6 of 9 PagelD# 500

15. In or about summer of 2010, the precise date being unknown, in response
to a tasking from the 103, the defendant drew a sketch of the floor plan of a particular
CIA facility located abroad, which was no longer in use. The defendant never disclosed
this tasking or the sketch he created during the 2012 CIA interviews.

a. On May 31, 2013, during an interview with Special Agents of the FBI,

the defendant admitted that he created the drawing. He stated that he
tore it up, threw it away, and never gave it to the 105.

16. On March 8, 2012, during the first of the CIA interviews described in
paragraph 1 1, the defendant falsely stated that he had not traveled to mainland China for
approximately two years so as not to give the 105 a chance to talk to him.

a. As late as December 7, 2012, the defendant continued to falsely tell the
CIA interviewers that he had not been to mainland China since being
approached by the [Os in April 2010, when in fact, by this time, he had
traveled into mainland China on two separate occasions.

17. On April 22, 2012, a Yahoo! email account was created from an IP
address that resolved to Guangzhou, China. The account?s user name related to one of
the defendant?s close family members.

a. During a 2013 FBI interview, the defendant disclosed that he had
received several email accounts from the 103. The defendant stated that
he could not remember any of the other accounts but that he could
remember this account because of the connection to the close family

member.

Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 7 of 9 PagelD# 501

18. On August 13, 2012, the FBI conducted the court-authorized search
referenced in paragraph 13. In addition to the thumb drive described above, that search
revealed the defendant possessed within his personal luggage a 2002 Day Planner and an
address book. The two books contained handwritten notes made by the defendant,
including personal information such as banking and password information. The
preponderance of the notes related to his work as a CIA case of?cer prior to 2004.

These notes included, among other things, intelligence provided by CIA assets, true
names of assets, operational meeting locations and phone numbers, and information
about covert facilities. As the defendant well knew, many of these entries were
classi?ed up to the Secret level and contained national defense information of the United
States.

19. On February 9, 20l3, an email was posted in the email account described
in paragraph 17. The subject of the email was ?How?s Christina?? The message read:

?Long time no see, I-Iow?s christina?s grade book 

We have not seen her recent grade book for a few months,maybe [sic] little girl
always like changing her mind.?

The account had been accessed from China. The government is not alleging that the

defendant accessed this account.

20. On January 15, 2018, during an interview with Special Agents of the FBI,
in Queens, New York, the defendant falsely denied that he ever kept any work-related
notes at home. When shown a photocopy of the front covers of the notebooks described
above, as well as a copy of his handwriting therein, the defendant falsely denied that he
possessed the notebooks while transiting through Hawaii in August 2012. The defendant

falsely denied that either of the books contained notes from asset meetings but conceded

7

Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 8 of 9 PagelD# 502

that any such notes would be classi?ed. The defendant also falsely denied that he ever
put the document described in paragraph 13 on a thumb drive, notwithstanding the fact
that he had admitted having done so when he was interviewed by FBI agents on May 28,
2013. Finally, he also falsely told the interviewing agents that in drafting this document
he was writing down things ?more [like] a diary thing,? notwithstanding the fact that on
May 28, 2013, he had told FBI agents thathe had created the document in response to
two taskings from the Chinese 103.

21. This statement of facts includes those facts necessary to support the plea
agreement between the defendant and the United States. It does not include each and

every fact known to the defendant or to the United States, and it is not intended to be a
full enumeration of all of the facts surrounding the defendant?s case.

22. The actions of the defendant, as recounted above, were in all respects
knowing and deliberate, and were not committed by mistake, accident, or other innocent
reason.

Respectfully submitted,

G. Zachary Terwilliger
United States Attorney

0 Date: 770, 30 By: ZK ZZYW

W. Neil Hammerstrom, 
Assistant United States AV

MW 

 

 

Adam L. Small Patrick T. 
Trial Attorney Trial Attorney 
United States Department of Justice United States Department of Justice

 Case Document 169 Filed 05/01/19 Page 9 of 9 PagelD# 503

After consulting with my attorney and pursuant to the plea agreement entered into
this day between the defendant, Jerry Chun Shing Lee, and the United States, I hereby
stipulate that the above Statement of Facts is true and accurate, and that had the matter
proceeded to trial, the United States would have proved the same beyond a reasonable
doubt

Jerry Chun Shing Lee
Defendant

 

I am defendant Jerry Chun Shing Lee?s attorney. I have carefully reviewed the

above Statement of Facts with him. To my knowledge, his decision to stipulate to these

facts is an informed and voluntary one. 

A 4 

Edward B. MacMaho?n, Jr.
Counsel for the Defendant