Taking Action: an Advocate's Guide to Assisting Victims of Financial Fraud
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
6 Cybercrime
Internet and Technology Law: A U.S. Perspective Cybercrime 6 Cybercrime Objectives Ater completing this chapter, the student should be able to: • Describe the three types of computer crime; • Describe and deine the types of Internet crime that target individuals and businesses; and • Explain the key federal laws that target Internet crime against property. 6.1 Overview his chapter will review privacy and security breaches on the Internet that are of a criminal nature, or called cybercrime. Broadly speaking, cybercrime is deined as any illegal action that uses or targets computer networks to violate the law. he U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)317 categorizes computer crime in three ways: 1. As a target: a computer is the subject of the crime (such causing computer damage). For example, a computer attacks the computer(s) of others in a malicious way (such as spreading a virus). 2. As a weapon or a tool: a computer is used to help commit the crime. his means that the computer is used to commit “traditional crime” normally occurring in the physical world (such as fraud or illegal gambling). 3. As an accessory or incidental to the crime: a computer is used peripherally (such as for recordkeeping purposes). he DOJ suggests this would be using a computer as a “fancy iling cabinet” to store illegal or stolen information.318 6.2 Types of Crimes Many types of crimes are committed in today’s networked environment. hey can involve either people, businesses, or property. Perhaps you have been a victim of Internet crime, or chances are you know someone who has been a victim. -
Toolkit for March Fraud Prevention Month 2018 Middle Agers
Toolkit for March Fraud Prevention Month 2018 Middle Agers FRAUD: Recognize. Reject. Report. Table of Contents Introduction ‐‐‐ 3 RCMP Videos ‐‐‐ 4 OPP Fraud Prevention Videos ‐‐‐ 4 Competition Bureau Fraud Prevention Videos ‐‐‐ 4 CAFC Logo ‐‐‐ 4 Calendar of Events ‐ Facebook and Twitter ‐‐‐ 5 Statistics ‐‐‐ 6 Theme 3: Scams Targeting Middle Agers ‐‐‐ 7 Service ‐‐‐ 7 Extortion ‐‐‐ 7 Personal Information ‐‐‐ 8 Loan ‐‐‐ 8 Investment ‐‐‐ 9 Text Message ‐‐‐ 10 2 Introduction In preparation for March Fraud Prevention Month, the Canadian Anti‐Fraud Centre (CAFC) has compiled a toolkit specifically designed for middle aged Canadians to further raise awareness and help prevent victimization. We encourage all partnering organizations to use the CAFC logo, contact points and resource materials in this toolkit on their website, in print and on their social media platforms. The CAFC will actively be posting on Facebook and Twitter daily (#FPM2018, #MPF2018) and participating in the fraud chats: Use the following hashtag – #fraudchat – to join. The CAFC is Canada’s central repository for data, intelligence and resource material as it relates to mass marketing fraud and identity fraud. Victims who report to the CAFC are also encouraged to report directly to their local police. The CAFC does not conduct investigations but provides valuable assistance to law enforcement agencies all over the world by identifying connections among seemingly unrelated cases. Your information may provide the piece that completes the puzzle. The CAFC is a support agency to law enforcement. Middle Aged consumers can report directly to the CAFC by calling toll free 1‐888‐495‐8501 or online through the CAFC Online Fraud Reporting System (FRS). -
Young Adults 2021-02-15
2021 Fraud Prevention Toolkit – Young Adults 2021-02-15 YOUNG ADULTS 2021 Fraud Prevention Toolkit Table of Contents Introduction --- 3 RCMP Videos --- 4 OPP Videos --- 4 Competition Bureau of Canada Videos --- 4 CAFC Fraud Prevention Video Playlists --- 4 CAFC Logo --- 4 Calendar of Events --- 5 About the CAFC --- 7 Statistics --- 7 Reporting Fraud --- 8 Most Common Frauds Targeting Young Adults --- 8 • Identity Theft & Fraud --- 9 • Extortion --- 10 • Investments --- 11 • Job --- 12 • Merchandise --- 13 Young Adults 2 Introduction As fraud rates continue to increase in Canada, the world is going through a global pandemic. The COVID-19 has created an environment that is ripe for fraud and online criminal activity. The COVID-19 has resulted in never-before-seen numbers of people turning to the internet for their groceries, everyday shopping, banking and companionship. Coupled with the profound social, psychological and emotional impacts of COVID-19 on people, one could argue that the pool of potential victims has increased dramatically. March is Fraud Prevention Month. This year’s efforts will focus on the Digital Economy of Scams and Frauds. The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) has compiled a toolkit specifically designed for young adult Canadians (born 1987-2005) to further raise public awareness and prevent victimization. We encourage all our partner to use the resources in this toolkit on their website, in print and on their social media platforms. Throughout the year, the CAFC will be using the #kNOwfraud and #ShowmetheFRAUD descriptors to link fraud prevention messaging. We will also continue to use the slogan “Fraud: Recognize, Reject, Report”. During Fraud Prevention Month, the CAFC will post daily on its Facebook and Twitter platforms (#FPM2021). -
National Trading Standards – Scams Team Review
EUROPE National Trading Standards – Scams Team Review Jeremy Lonsdale, Daniel Schweppenstedde, Lucy Strang, Martin Stepanek, Kate Stewart For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1510 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., and Cambridge, UK R® is a registered trademark. © Copyright 2016 National Trading Standards RAND Europe is an independent, not-for-profit policy research organisation that aims to improve policy and decisionmaking in the public interest through research and analysis. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the sponsor. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org www.rand.org/randeurope Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... 3 Preface .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 7 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ -
Cadenza Document
Statewide Convictions by Offense (Summary) FORGERY/FRAUD 1/1/1999 to 12/31/2012 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 OFOF 1 1 FELC 5 7 3 11 16 10 8 18 12 15 9 8 21 27 FELD 846 926 1,229 1,279 1,155 1,104 1,184 1,171 1,008 762 716 537 646 799 AGMS 383 404 534 559 574 603 699 643 655 699 606 680 643 642 SRMS 16 15 7 15 16 12 4 20 9 20 21 16 40 58 SMMS 41 36 46 58 42 58 36 39 53 37 47 60 70 68 UNKN 87 46 27 19 12 2 Totals 1,379 1,434 1,846 1,941 1,815 1,788 1,931 1,891 1,737 1,533 1,401 1,301 1,420 1,594 FORGERY/FRAUD 1/1/1999 to 12/31/2012 1999 Convicting Chg Convicting Description Class Convictions 234.13(1)(C) FOOD STAMP FRAUD-FALSE STATEMENTS (AGMS) AGMS 1 234.13(1)(D) FOOD STAMP FRAUD-FALSE STATEMENTS (SRMS) SRMS 1 234.13(3)(E) FOOD STAMP FRAUD-UNLAWFUL COUPON USE (SMMS) SMMS 1 714.10 FRAUDULENT PRACTICE 2ND DEGREE - 1978 (FELD) FELD 82 714.11 DNU - FRAUDULENT PRACTICE IN THE THIRD DEGREE - AGMS 66 714.11(1) FRAUDULENT PRACTICE THIRD DEGREE--$500-UNDER $1000 (AGMS) AGMS 16 714.11(3) FRAUDULENT PRACTICE 3RD DEGREE-AMOUNT UNDETERMINABLE (AGMS) AGMS 6 714.12 FRAUDULENT PRACTICE 4TH DEGREE - 1978 (SRMS) SRMS 11 714.13 FRAUDULENT PRACTICE 5TH DEGREE - 1978 (SMMS) SMMS 28 714.1(3)-B DNU - THEFT BY DECEPTION (FELD) FELD 3 714.1(3)-C DNU - THEFT BY DECEPTION (AGMS) AGMS 2 714.1(3)-D DNU-THEFT BY DECEPTION (SMMS) SMMS 12 714.1(3)-E DNU-THEFT BY DECEPTION (SRMS) SRMS 3 714.9 FRAUDULENT PRACTICE 1ST DEGREE - 1978 (FELC) FELC 4 715.6 FALSE USE OF FIN. -
Doesn't Fit Any Crime Arrests
Minneapolis City of Lakes - DRAFT - Doesn’t Fit Any Crime Arrests Police Conduct Oversight Commission December 2015 DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 AUGUST 11, 2015 ACLU PRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSION ...................................................................................................... 3 POLICE REPORTING SYSTEM ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 “DOESN’T FIT ANY CRIME” ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 STUDY GOALS: ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5 SAMPLE COLLECTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. -
Mass-Marketing Fraud
Mass-Marketing Fraud A Report to the Attorney General of the United States and the Solicitor General of Canada May 2003 ��� Binational Working Group on Cross-Border Mass-Marketing Fraud Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................... ii Introduction ...............................................................viii Section I: Mass-Marketing Fraud Today ........................................1 Section II: The Response to Mass-Marketing Fraud, 1998-2003 .................... 26 Section III: Current Challenges in Cross-Border Fraud - Towards A Binational Action Plan .................................................................56 Appendix - Selected Cross-Border Mass-Marketing Fraud Enforcement Actions ..... 69 i Executive Summary Section I: Mass-Marketing Fraud Today Telemarketing Fraud ! Cross-border telemarketing fraud remains one of the most pervasive forms of white-collar crime in Canada and the United States. The PhoneBusters National Call Centre estimates that on any given day, there are 500 to 1,000 criminal telemarketing boiler rooms, grossing about $1 billion a year, operating in Canada. (3) ! Several types of cross-border telemarketing fraud have increased substantially from 1997 to 2002: fraudulent prize and lottery schemes; fraudulent loan offers; and fraudulent offers of low-interest credit cards or credit-card protection. (3) ! Seven trends in cross-border telemarketing fraud since 1997 are especially noteworthy: • (1) Types of Telemarketing Fraud “Pitches”. The most prevalent among Canadian-based telemarketing fraud operations are fraudulent offers of prizes or lotteries; fraudulent loan offers; and fraudulent offers of low- interest credit cards or credit-card protection. (5) • (2) Methods of Transmitting Funds. Criminal telemarketers generally prefer their victims to use electronic payment services, such as Western Union and Travelers Express MoneyGram, to send funds for the promised goods or services. -
Section 3: Preventing Fraud
SECTION 3. Preventing Fraud There are over 50 different types of fraud – know how to protect yourself A guide for seniors 19 SECTION 3. Preventing Fraud Financial abuse of a senior is any act involving Why Seniors are Vulnerable to Fraud the misuse of the senior’s money or property Seniors are at increased risk of being targeted by without their full knowledge and consent. The con artists largely because: abuser could be a stranger, but it could be a family member, friend or neighbour. This section ¾ many seniors have substantial savings or of the guide focuses on the five most common assets categories of fraud experienced by seniors: ¾ scammers assume that seniors will be more ¿ door-to-door sales fraud, trusting ¿ investment fraud, ¾ seniors often feel they should be polite towards ¿ telemarketing fraud, strangers ¿ prize/contest fraud, and ¾ seniors are more likely to be home alone during ¿ identity fraud. the day Frauds (or scams) come in many forms. There are over 50 different types of fraud that have been classified and reported in Canada. Being familiar with the common scams will help you be prepared to detect and avoid being a victim of con artists. Phone Busters reports that Canadians lost $24,095,234 in a single calendar year on FACT mass marketing fraud. 20 A guide for seniors A. Know the Common Types of Fraud Door-to-Door Sales Fraud How to Avoid The person at your door seems ¾ Ask to see the persons license. Under the Direct genuine and will tell you they just Sellers Act, door-to-door salespersons are happened to be in the area. -
Scams Pamphlet (PDF)
http://www.fraud.org/learn/older-adult-fraud/they-can-t-hang-up “Fraud.org is an important partner in the FTC’s fight to protect consumers from being victimized by fraud.” - FTC Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen They Can't Hang Up According to the National Consumers League, nearly a third of all telemarketing fraud victims are age 60 or older. Studies by AARP show that most older telemarketing fraud victims don’t realize that the voice on the phone could belong to someone who is trying to steal their money. Many consumers believe that salespeople nice young men or women simply trying to make a living. They may be pushy or exaggerate the offer, but they’re basically honest. While that’s true for most telemarketers, there are some whose intentions are to rob people, using phones as their weapons. The FBI says that there are thousands of fraudulent telemarketing companies operating in the United States. There are also an increasing number of illegal telemarketers who target U.S. residents from locations in Canada and other countries. It’s difficult for victims, especially seniors, to think of fraudulent telemarketers’ actions as crimes, rather than hard sells. Many are even reluctant to admit that they have been cheated or robbed by illegal telemarketers. Step 1 THE FIRST STEP in helping older people who may be targets is to convince them that fraudulent telemarketers are hardened criminals who don’t care about the pain they cause when they steal someone’s life savings. Once seniors understand that illegal telemarketing is a serious crime— punishable by heavy fines and long prison sentences—they are more likely to hang up and report the fraud to law enforcement authorities. -
Zerohack Zer0pwn Youranonnews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men
Zerohack Zer0Pwn YourAnonNews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men YamaTough Xtreme x-Leader xenu xen0nymous www.oem.com.mx www.nytimes.com/pages/world/asia/index.html www.informador.com.mx www.futuregov.asia www.cronica.com.mx www.asiapacificsecuritymagazine.com Worm Wolfy Withdrawal* WillyFoReal Wikileaks IRC 88.80.16.13/9999 IRC Channel WikiLeaks WiiSpellWhy whitekidney Wells Fargo weed WallRoad w0rmware Vulnerability Vladislav Khorokhorin Visa Inc. Virus Virgin Islands "Viewpointe Archive Services, LLC" Versability Verizon Venezuela Vegas Vatican City USB US Trust US Bankcorp Uruguay Uran0n unusedcrayon United Kingdom UnicormCr3w unfittoprint unelected.org UndisclosedAnon Ukraine UGNazi ua_musti_1905 U.S. Bankcorp TYLER Turkey trosec113 Trojan Horse Trojan Trivette TriCk Tribalzer0 Transnistria transaction Traitor traffic court Tradecraft Trade Secrets "Total System Services, Inc." Topiary Top Secret Tom Stracener TibitXimer Thumb Drive Thomson Reuters TheWikiBoat thepeoplescause the_infecti0n The Unknowns The UnderTaker The Syrian electronic army The Jokerhack Thailand ThaCosmo th3j35t3r testeux1 TEST Telecomix TehWongZ Teddy Bigglesworth TeaMp0isoN TeamHav0k Team Ghost Shell Team Digi7al tdl4 taxes TARP tango down Tampa Tammy Shapiro Taiwan Tabu T0x1c t0wN T.A.R.P. Syrian Electronic Army syndiv Symantec Corporation Switzerland Swingers Club SWIFT Sweden Swan SwaggSec Swagg Security "SunGard Data Systems, Inc." Stuxnet Stringer Streamroller Stole* Sterlok SteelAnne st0rm SQLi Spyware Spying Spydevilz Spy Camera Sposed Spook Spoofing Splendide -
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama Northern Division
Case 2:13-cr-00144-LSC-TFM Document 38 Filed 12/19/13 Page 1 of 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) CASE NO. 2:13-cr-144-MEF-TFM ) [wo] EDMUND MCCALL ) RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) this case was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for review and submission of a report with recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law. On August 22, 2013, the Grand Jury for the Middle District of Alabama returned an indictment against Antonio Harris (“Harris”) and defendant, Edmund McCall (“McCall” or “Defendant”). Count 1 of the Indictment alleges McCall and others conspired to use the mail and wire communications to execute a scheme and artifice to defraud the United States by filing false, federal income tax returns from 2010 through October 29, 2012. Count 2-6 of the Indictment alleges McCall and others executed the scheme and artifice to defraud the United States by 5 wire communications between January 16, 2012 and March 7, 2012. Counts 7 and 8 of the Indictment allege Harris and McCall engaged in identity theft and aggravated identity theft in relation to wire fraud. Counts 9 through 12 of the Indictment alleges Harris, McCall and others presented false claims against the United States by filing false tax returns between January 16, 2012 and February 29, 2012. Page 1 of 28 Case 2:13-cr-00144-LSC-TFM Document 38 Filed 12/19/13 Page 2 of 28 Counts 13 through 15 of the Indictment allege Harris filed false claims against the United States by filing false tax returns between January 30, 2013, and February 9, 2013. -
Affidavit in Support of Criminal Complaint
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MAY l,') 8 (,L,l."',qi:'l FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS CUFFORD J. PROUD US.MAG5TRATEJUOGE SOl.J1lfERN DlSTRlcr OF ILLlNOl" EAST sr. LOU5 OF"fICE '- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) NICHOLAS A. SMIRNOW ) a/k/a Nicoloy Smirnow, Alexander Judizcev, ) Nicholas Kachura, and JeffProzorowiczm, ) ) Defendant. ) AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT I, Postal Inspector Jacob M. Gholson, being first duly sworn, hereby depose and state as follows: 1. I am a Postal Inspector with the United States Postal Inspection Service, and have been since March, 2008. I have been working mail fraud cases since July 2008. Overview ofscam 2. As is detailed more fully within, Pathway to Prosperity ("P-2-P") was an internet Ponzi scheme that promised investors worldwide very high returns with little or no risk. P-2-P purported to afford to the average person the opportunity to take advantage ofinvestment vehicles ostensibly available to only the very rich. As represented to investors, by investing with P-2-P, the average investor would supposedly pool his or her money with that ofother investors to "piggyback" on the investment ofP-2-P and its principal, NICHOLAS A. SMIRNOW ("SMIRNOW"). 3. Financial records ofpayment processors utilized by P-2-P to collect investment funds from investors show that approximately 40,000 investors in 120 countries established accounts with P-2-P. Despite the fact that the investment was supposedly "guaranteed," investors lost approximately $70 million as a result ofSMIRNOW'S actions. Smirnow's pathway to prosperity 4. The investigation ofP-2-P began when the Government received a referral from the Illinois Securities Department concerning an elderly Southern District of Illinois resident who had made a substantial investment in P-2-P.