USv. Shephard: Shephard worked at a call center in
Costa Rica that was engaged in a fairly common scam – they’d call people in the
United States, tell them they’d won a monetary prize, but then explain that the
winner had to pay some money up front to secure their winnings. As particularly
relevant to this appeal, Shephard and others involved with the scam would go
back to already victimized scammers to seek more money (on the promise of even
greater winnings), a process called “reloading.” Shephard eventually pleaded
guilty to numerous fraud counts and at sentencing was assessed an enhancement
for having taken advantage of vulnerable victims.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed
the enhancement and Shephard’s sentence. The court noted that reloading “involves
targeting people who have already fallen victim to the scheme at least once, if
not repeatedly.” Following the lead of other Circuits, the court concluded that
“a victim’s decision to wire money in response to the initial fraudulent call
is evidence that they are ‘particularly susceptible to the criminal conduct’
and that is why fraudsters then repeatedly target that victim.” The court held
that there was “no clear error in the district court’s determination that some
victims were particularly vulnerable and that Shephard was aware of the
vulnerability” and that it “is why she and her coconspirators purposefully
targeted such victims again and again.”
No comments:
Post a Comment