SCM NEWS & OPINIONS

Services Provided by RMR Consulting to Jeremy Johnson

Services Provided by RMR Consulting to Jeremy Johnson

We are deeply troubled about the misrepresentations made by Jeremy Johnson regarding the consulting arrangement between Johnson and RMR Consulting, a company owned by deceased Richard Rawle.  Accusations made by Johnson of bribery or attempted bribery are completely false. 

Richard Rawle was contacted by John Swallow to see if he might help Jeremy Johnson with a potential civil dispute Johnson’s company, I Works, was having with the Federal Trade Commission.   At that time neither Johnson nor his company was under any criminal indictment.  Johnson represented to Rawle that he was an upstanding citizen in the community. 

When Johnson met with Rawle on October 12, 2010, Johnson stated he was facing a potential civil suit from the FTC in the coming weeks, but that he was unable to tell his story to the FTC.  Johnson admitted to Rawle that he was inexperienced with government relations and was in no position to get a proper audience with the FTC to tell his story.  Rawle had developed some government affairs relationships from his professional career and was willing to offer his assistance.  Rawle made it clear in the meeting that because of the short amount of time I Works had, his attempts to gain an audience with the FTC may not work.   Johnson and Rawle agreed to a non-refundable fee of $250,000.  John Swallow was not present at that meeting nor did he participate in the determination of any of the terms of the consulting arrangement between Johnson and RMR Consulting.   Two of Rawle’s associates were present and are witnesses to these proceedings. 

RMR Consulting received $250,000 in two payments; $50,000 from I Works on November 2, 2010 and $200,000 from Scott Leavitt, an associate of Johnson, on December 2, 2010, approximately six weeks after the initial meeting. Once the retainer was paid, RMR sent payments to two firms, which were retained to work on the matter: $50,000 to T.R. Rupli & Associates and $50,000 to Brown, Brown & Premsrirut.  After the retainer was paid on December 2, 2010, firms began a due diligence inquiry into I Works and its industry.  No lobbying efforts took place because the FTC filed its complaint against Johnson, Leavitt and I Works on December 22, 2010, just twenty days after the firms were engaged and before the due diligence involving I Works was completed.  After the complaint was filed, RMR Consulting could no longer be of assistance to I Works.

Johnson and Leavitt approached RMR Consulting in May of 2012 to seek a refund of their money.   In November 2012, Leavitt and RMR Consulting came to an agreement whereby $100,000 was to be refunded to Mr. Leavitt ($25,000 of which remains in escrow until the FTC action against Leavitt are completed).  In a settlement agreement and affidavit, Scott Leavitt, Johnson’s associate and primary contributor to the retainer, acknowledged under penalty of perjury that the October 2010 arrangement was for government relations work on behalf of I Works.  Leavitt’s sworn statement supports the statements made by Richard Rawle and John Swallow, and directly contradicts Johnson’s false accusations. 

Questions have also been raised whether John Swallow was paid for Johnson’s introduction to Richard Rawle and RMR Consulting. Swallow was not paid for that introduction or the subsequent consulting arrangement between Johnson and RMR.  Swallow was paid for consulting services he provided Chaparral Limestone & Cement, a company in which Rawle had an ownership interest. 

Specious accusations by Jeremy Johnson against Richard Rawle are nothing more than a “last ditch effort” to try and influence the current ongoing federal prosecution.  The Rawle Family is deeply concerned about Johnson’s defamatory statements against their recently deceased Father. 
Richard Rawle had an impeccable reputation for honesty and integrity throughout his personal and professional life.  The activities that RMR Consulting provided to Johnson were nothing more than standard government relations work.