The defendent admitted to using a deceased Veteran's identification and social security numberto ripoff the Veteran's Administration and Social Security Administration. Do not let her walk away with no jail time.

Write: To make your voice heard!

United States District Court Middle District of Florida OrlandoDivision

United States Probation Office Attention: Angela Harris Butler

401 West Central Boulevard Suite 1400

Orlando, FL 32801-0120

Case 6:10-cr-00258-GAP-KRS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

A. Particularized Terms

1, Count Pleading To The defendant shall enter a plea of guilty to Count One of the Indictment. Count One charges the defendant with theft of government money, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 641. 2. Maximum Penalties Count One carries a maximum sentence of not more than 10 years' imprisonment, a fine of not more than $250,000, or twice the gross gain caused by the offense, or twice the gross loss caused by the offense, whichever is greater, a term of supervised release of not more than 3 years, and a special assessment of $100 per felony count, said special assessment to be due on the date of sentencing. With Case 6:10-cr-00258-GAP-KRS Document 25 Filed 01/10/11 Page 2 of 14

3. Elements of the Offense The defendant acknowledges understanding the nature and elements of the offense with which defendant has been charged and to which defendant is pleading guilty. The elements of Count One are: the money or property described in the indictment belonged to the United States; The Defendant embezzled, stole, or knowingly converted the money or property to her own use; the Defendant knowingly and willfully intended to deprive the owner of the use or benefit of the money or property; and the money or property had a value greater than $1,000.

9. Factual Basis Defendant is pleading guilty because defendant is in fact guilty. The defendant certifies that defendant does hereby admit that the facts set forth below are true, and were this case to go to trial, the United States would be able to prove those specific facts and others beyond a reasonable doubt:

Case 6:10-cr-00258-GAP-KRS Document 25 Filed 01/10/11 Page 11 of 14

FACTS

On April 10, 2010, R.J.B. reported to the Orlando Social Security Administration District Office ("Orlando SSA") that he was the biological father of AK. who was receiving social security survival benefits on C.F.1. who had died July 4, 2006. Jennifer Isenman ("ISENMAN"), R.J.B.'s ex-girlfriend and mother of AK., filed for benefits on October 24, 2006, claiming that C.F.1. was the father of AK., when, in fact, he was not AK.'s biological father; instead, he was ISENMAN'S uncle.

ISENMAN was awarded social security survivor benefits which she continued to receive until November 2010. The Veteran Affairs Office of Inspector General's Office ("VA-OIG") began its investigation pursuant to a May 5, 2010 hotline complaint reporting that ISENMAN was receiving veteran survivor benefits for her child, AK., under C.F.I.'s claims file number. ISENMAN informed the Department of Veteran Affairs ("VA") that her child's, AK., father was C.F.I., a deceased veteran, so that she could obtain Dependency and Indemnity Compensation ("DIC") for AK. On October 17, 2006, the VA received a claim for DIC for AK. ISENMAN claimed to have been married, by common law, to C.F.I., who was injured while serving in the military and died on July 4, 2006, due to complications from his service related injuries. ISENMAN provided to the VA a VA Form 21-534 "Application for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, Death Pension and Accrued Benefits by a Surviving Spouse or Child (Including Death Compensation if Applicable)", a VA Form 21-4170 "Statement of Marital Relationship" and two VA Form 21-4171's "Supporting Statement Regarding Marriage". On VA Form 21-534, ISENMAN stated that she and C.F.1. lived together like husband and wife, she was expecting the birth of his child, and she was not receiving benefits for her child from the Social Security Administration (USSA"). She signed VA Form 21-534 on October 10, 2006. On October 10,2006, ISENMAN executed VA Form 21-4170 and stated that she lived with C.F.1. from June 2005 until his death.

On April 8, 2008, the VA Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio provided a decision in reference to AK.'s claim for DIC benefits. The VA granted AK.'s DIC benefits effective September 7, 2006. ISENMAN, on behalf of AK., initially received $438 per month, and then the payment increased each year to a current payment of $488 per month.

A copy of the DNA Parentage Test Report from DOC DNA Diagnostics Center in Fairfield, Ohio shows the mother of AK. as ISENMAN, and the father as RJ.B. The DNA samples were collected from ISENMAN, AK., and RJ.B. on September 15, 2006, and on September 22,2006, it was determined that the probability of RJ.B. of being the biological father of AK. was 99.9999996%. RJ.B. provided Orlando SSA and VAOIG with a copy of a Certificate of Birth for AK., with a date of birth of September 7, 2006, an issue date of December 8,2006, and the father's name of RJ.B. RJ.B. also provided a copy of an Acknowledgment of Paternity showing the child as AK., mother as ISENMAN, and the natural father as RJ.B. ISENMAN and RJ.B. signed the form and it was notarized on December 5, 2006.

On June 23, 2010, Special Agent Mervyn Miller (USA Miller") interviewed ISENMAN at Orlando SSA Prior to the interview, SA Miller advised ISENMAN that the interview was voluntary and that she did not have to answer questions. Further, if she decided to answer questions, she could stop the questioning at any time. ISENMAN said she understood and agreed to the interview. ISENMAN admitted that on September 22,2006, a DNA test was conducted identifying the biological father of AK. to be her then boyfriend, R.J.B. ISENMAN stated that on October 24,2006, she applied for social security survivor benefits for AK. using her uncle's name, C.F.I., as the father. ISENMAN acknowledged that she knew it was wrong to have applied for and received social security survivor benefits for AK. using her uncle's name and social security number.

From September 2006 through June 2010, ISENMAN fraudulently received $29,679.00 in social security survivor benefits on behalf of AK., of which she was not entitled, for her own use. At all times relevant, ISENMAN knew AK. was not entitled to the social security survivor benefits because C.F.1. was not the biological father of AK.; nevertheless, she continued to take the money for her personal use. From October 1, 2006 through November 30,2010, ISENMAN fraudulently received $23,556.00 in veteran benefits on behalf of AK., to which she was not entitled, for her own use. At all times relevant, ISENMAN knew A K. was not entitled to the veteran benefits because C.F.1. was not the biological father of AK., nevertheless, she continued to take the money.

United States Attorney

By: LaKesia Assistant United States Attorney