"The document, which purported to bear official letterhead, falsely stated that it was a directive issued by the 'Director of TAO' and that Culver was a 'federal asset' active in multiple investigations."
Joshua Culver’s arrest, appearance, and charges
Colorado police arrested Joshua Culver, also known as “Maverick Young,” last week and he appeared in a Colorado court Tuesday, according to court filings referenced in the indictment. The filing, returned in Indiana in July, charges Culver with four counts of falsely impersonating an officer of the court and one count of using a forged signature of a judge. A defender appointed to Culver did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Alleged impersonation of an NSA officer and threats to Tippecanoe County
The indictment alleges Culver pretended to be an officer of the National Security Agency in September of last year and, in that capacity, told the Tippecanoe County sheriff’s office in Lafayette, Ind., that he “could take adverse action” if it did not provide him information he sought — including the location of his biological daughter. The complaint identifies Lafayette, Ind., and Tippecanoe County as the intended recipients of that alleged impersonation.
Audit-ready is a season. It shouldn't be.
Evidence in spreadsheets, controls drifting between audits, frameworks multiplying on flat headcount. Nubivance runs continuous compliance on Rapid7 Cyber GRC - SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI, CMMC.
End the scramblePurported Tailored Access Operations directive presented to Lake County court
Prosecutors say Culver again claimed to be an NSA officer in the same month and later produced a document to the Clerk of the Lake County, Ind., Superior Court that purported to come from the head of the Tailored Access Operations (TAO) unit. The indictment describes the document as appearing to bear official letterhead and falsely stating it was a directive from the “Director of TAO.” It also claims the document asserted that Culver was a “federal asset” active in multiple investigations and commanded that Lake County take a set of actions “as required by ‘federal directive,’” including dismissing the case against Culver with prejudice, quashing warrants, and cooperating with a “federal audit” of individuals identified in the document.
Forgery of Chief Justice John Roberts’ signature in Grant County filing
The indictment further alleges that Culver used a forged signature of Chief Justice John Roberts in September for an “Order of Dismissal With Prejudice” filed in a case against Culver in Grant County, Indiana. That alleged forgery is charged alongside the impersonation counts in the July indictment.
TAO’s name history and the document’s wider resonance
The filing notes organizational context for the unit Culver invoked: Tailored Access Operations has gone by the name Office of Computer Network Operations since 2017, although, the filing states, it indicated in July that it was resuming its old name. The indictment also references TAO’s prior public scrutiny, saying the unit “garnered unflattering attention in 2017 after the global WannaCry ransomware outbreak used an exploit that the NSA developed.”
What this means for Tippecanoe County officials, Lake County clerks, and the courts
- Tippecanoe County sheriff’s office and Lake County court clerks — These offices were direct targets of the alleged impersonations and paperwork; the indictment documents how purported federal directives and threats were used to demand information and case actions.
- Grant County court and filings systems — The allegation of a forged signature tied to a specific court document highlights how local court dockets and orders can be asserted or amended with fraudulent paperwork, according to the charges in the indictment.
- NSA/TAO and public perception — The indictment’s reference to TAO and its name history connects the alleged fraud to a unit that has been publicly associated with high-profile incidents, amplifying the document’s rhetorical force in the account prosecutors present.
The indictment itself is cited in the reporting; the filing identifier appears as gov.uscourts.cod.258103.1.1. For readers seeking the original published account, the story appeared on CyberScoop and can be read at the link below.
