Your siggy so fits this one
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
found supreme court case that helps me!
- Thread starter javajoe7
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
- Status
whys everyone so condescending and not helpful
look, heres what im trying to say.
im not saying that im not guilty of lesser things.
im saying , in what im reading, people have either gone through someones trash OR they have like pretneded to be someones bank and called or emailed them and asked for their information OR they actually paid someone for like in the one case a dead babys info or the foregin lady who paid to get a passport with someones info.
Im saying that the criminals who had the audacity to not only steal soomeones info and then post that info on the web, they are the ones in my case who should be charged with aggravated identity theft. I never knew if the info was real or not. i paid no one, i searched no ones trash, i didnt contact ant of the victims for their real info.
the point is banks do no due diligence. they just give credit to anyone who applies and let victims suffer the consequences becasue they KNOW they will make more money with giving instant credit than the fraud that occurs its just math to them and its WRONG! they shoudl require a fingerprint or something more secure than just some web application.
i didnt do anything aggravated. i will fight this in court but hopefully the prosecutor drops these serious charges and doesnt waste tax payers dollars more than need be.
look, heres what im trying to say.
im not saying that im not guilty of lesser things.
im saying , in what im reading, people have either gone through someones trash OR they have like pretneded to be someones bank and called or emailed them and asked for their information OR they actually paid someone for like in the one case a dead babys info or the foregin lady who paid to get a passport with someones info.
Im saying that the criminals who had the audacity to not only steal soomeones info and then post that info on the web, they are the ones in my case who should be charged with aggravated identity theft. I never knew if the info was real or not. i paid no one, i searched no ones trash, i didnt contact ant of the victims for their real info.
the point is banks do no due diligence. they just give credit to anyone who applies and let victims suffer the consequences becasue they KNOW they will make more money with giving instant credit than the fraud that occurs its just math to them and its WRONG! they shoudl require a fingerprint or something more secure than just some web application.
i didnt do anything aggravated. i will fight this in court but hopefully the prosecutor drops these serious charges and doesnt waste tax payers dollars more than need be.
justalayman
Senior Member
we have no idea what you did and as far as wasting taxpayers money; I'm more than glad to let the prosecutor know it's ok by me to spend the money to prosecute you.
question on prosecution's burden of proof of INTENT
As i continue to research my case, i forgot the main thing a prosecutor has to prove which is INTENT.
Correct me if i am wrong, but i think at least one of the jurors will directly relate to my situation which is during our countrys recessions i was out of work and couldnt pay my bills and my credit went bad and our country has no help or solution to this (well, they either want u to live in a shelter, the projects, or give u 200 a month in welfare which is outrageous as its at least 5 times less than the poverty level)( our country should be ashamed of itself)
SO
my INTENT was to create a new or synthetic identity JUST SO I COULD LIVE!
I never INTENTED to hurt another person.
just to note, when i show the jury (if the prosecutor produces it), the bank or credit applications, i will show them that OVER HALF of the information
doesnt match with the other person. the address, phone number, email address, and job/career status all were wrong BUT due to the bank not doing due diligence AT ALL they approved them. just to note, in the bank application case, they have a higher burden of due diligence as they have to comply with the PAtriot Act and besides the 4 identitfiers i mentioned above that were wrong, they also require a drivers license number which was also wrong. Remember im just mnentioning this gross negiligence just to show that the banks/credit card compnaies dont care abougt identity theft victims, they just want that instant credit business. for things to ever change, the banks need to do their part
JUST REMEMEBER MY QUESTION HERE IS ABOUT INTENT
THAT MY INTENT WAS TO CREATE A NEW IDENTITY (and if the banks/credit card companys were negligent enough to just approve and add it to someones credit file THAT LIVES NOT EVEN IN THE SAME STATE, then thats their fault)
AND JUST WOULD LIKE SOME PEOPLE HERE TO AGREE THAT AT LEAST ONE JUROR HAS HAD THE SAME SITUATION AKA LOST JOB, CREDIT GOES BAD, COUNTRY HAS NO ANSWER DURING A RECESSION ( or even now for that matter)
As i continue to research my case, i forgot the main thing a prosecutor has to prove which is INTENT.
Correct me if i am wrong, but i think at least one of the jurors will directly relate to my situation which is during our countrys recessions i was out of work and couldnt pay my bills and my credit went bad and our country has no help or solution to this (well, they either want u to live in a shelter, the projects, or give u 200 a month in welfare which is outrageous as its at least 5 times less than the poverty level)( our country should be ashamed of itself)
SO
my INTENT was to create a new or synthetic identity JUST SO I COULD LIVE!
I never INTENTED to hurt another person.
just to note, when i show the jury (if the prosecutor produces it), the bank or credit applications, i will show them that OVER HALF of the information
doesnt match with the other person. the address, phone number, email address, and job/career status all were wrong BUT due to the bank not doing due diligence AT ALL they approved them. just to note, in the bank application case, they have a higher burden of due diligence as they have to comply with the PAtriot Act and besides the 4 identitfiers i mentioned above that were wrong, they also require a drivers license number which was also wrong. Remember im just mnentioning this gross negiligence just to show that the banks/credit card compnaies dont care abougt identity theft victims, they just want that instant credit business. for things to ever change, the banks need to do their part
JUST REMEMEBER MY QUESTION HERE IS ABOUT INTENT
THAT MY INTENT WAS TO CREATE A NEW IDENTITY (and if the banks/credit card companys were negligent enough to just approve and add it to someones credit file THAT LIVES NOT EVEN IN THE SAME STATE, then thats their fault)
AND JUST WOULD LIKE SOME PEOPLE HERE TO AGREE THAT AT LEAST ONE JUROR HAS HAD THE SAME SITUATION AKA LOST JOB, CREDIT GOES BAD, COUNTRY HAS NO ANSWER DURING A RECESSION ( or even now for that matter)
As i continue to research my case, i forgot the main thing a prosecutor has to prove which is INTENT.
Correct me if i am wrong, but i think at least one of the jurors will directly relate to my situation which is during our countrys recessions i was out of work and couldnt pay my bills and my credit went bad and our country has no help or solution to this (well, they either want u to live in a shelter, the projects, or give u 200 a month in welfare which is outrageous as its at least 5 times less than the poverty level)( our country should be ashamed of itself)
SO
my INTENT was to create a new or synthetic identity JUST SO I COULD LIVE!
I never INTENTED to hurt another person.
just to note, when i show the jury (if the prosecutor produces it), the bank or credit applications, i will show them that OVER HALF of the information
doesnt match with the other person. the address, phone number, email address, and job/career status all were wrong BUT due to the bank not doing due diligence AT ALL they approved them. just to note, in the bank application case, they have a higher burden of due diligence as they have to comply with the PAtriot Act and besides the 4 identitfiers i mentioned above that were wrong, they also require a drivers license number which was also wrong. Remember im just mnentioning this gross negiligence just to show that the banks/credit card compnaies dont care abougt identity theft victims, they just want that instant credit business. for things to ever change, the banks need to do their part
JUST REMEMEBER MY QUESTION HERE IS ABOUT INTENT
THAT MY INTENT WAS TO CREATE A NEW IDENTITY (and if the banks/credit card companys were negligent enough to just approve and add it to someones credit file THAT LIVES NOT EVEN IN THE SAME STATE, then thats their fault)
AND JUST WOULD LIKE SOME PEOPLE HERE TO AGREE THAT AT LEAST ONE JUROR HAS HAD THE SAME SITUATION AKA LOST JOB, CREDIT GOES BAD, COUNTRY HAS NO ANSWER DURING A RECESSION ( or even now for that matter)
As i continue to research my case, i forgot the main thing a prosecutor has to prove which is INTENT.
Correct me if i am wrong, but i think at least one of the jurors will directly relate to my situation which is during our countrys recessions i was out of work and couldnt pay my bills and my credit went bad and our country has no help or solution to this (well, they either want u to live in a shelter, the projects, or give u 200 a month in welfare which is outrageous as its at least 5 times less than the poverty level)( our country should be ashamed of itself)
SO
my INTENT was to create a new or synthetic identity JUST SO I COULD LIVE!
I never INTENTED to hurt another person.
just to note, when i show the jury (if the prosecutor produces it), the bank or credit applications, i will show them that OVER HALF of the information
doesnt match with the other person. the address, phone number, email address, and job/career status all were wrong BUT due to the bank not doing due diligence AT ALL they approved them. just to note, in the bank application case, they have a higher burden of due diligence as they have to comply with the PAtriot Act and besides the 4 identitfiers i mentioned above that were wrong, they also require a drivers license number which was also wrong. Remember im just mnentioning this gross negiligence just to show that the banks/credit card compnaies dont care abougt identity theft victims, they just want that instant credit business. for things to ever change, the banks need to do their part
JUST REMEMEBER MY QUESTION HERE IS ABOUT INTENT
THAT MY INTENT WAS TO CREATE A NEW IDENTITY (and if the banks/credit card companys were negligent enough to just approve and add it to someones credit file THAT LIVES NOT EVEN IN THE SAME STATE, then thats their fault)
AND JUST WOULD LIKE SOME PEOPLE HERE TO AGREE THAT AT LEAST ONE JUROR HAS HAD THE SAME SITUATION AKA LOST JOB, CREDIT GOES BAD, COUNTRY HAS NO ANSWER DURING A RECESSION ( or even now for that matter)
Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
So...you ADMIT that you intended to do what you are accused of doing? You really need to stop posting, as you can easily undermine any shred of a defense you might (MIGHT) still have.
Mass_Shyster
Senior Member
You intended to create a new identity by taking another and changing it around some.
The prosecutor will liken that to creating a new car by stealing someone else's car and repainting it.
The prosecutor will liken that to creating a new car by stealing someone else's car and repainting it.
tranquility
Senior Member
What is the intent required?
What you are looking for is the *defense* of defense of life. You say you cannot be convicted, as you did the crime for the greater good--to keep you alive. This defense does not work. Most any criminal below a certain point of income/assets could claim the same.
Do you think the excuse would work if you shot and robbed someone? If a true defense on your facts, it would work there just as well.
By saying WHY you did one of the things prohibited, you clearly admit to the intent portion of the statute--knowing.
What you are looking for is the *defense* of defense of life. You say you cannot be convicted, as you did the crime for the greater good--to keep you alive. This defense does not work. Most any criminal below a certain point of income/assets could claim the same.
Do you think the excuse would work if you shot and robbed someone? If a true defense on your facts, it would work there just as well.
forgot to mention
i didnt KNOW it was a real persons information, i just found it on a free web forum and half the time at least people lie on those forums. the people that actually stole the persons info knew it was real and then had the audacity to post it on web forums. anyways like i said over half the applications information was wrong so clearly i attempted to make a new identity, the banks just are so negliglent they dont care, and if i was charged with attempting to create a new identity, then ok but im not.
i didnt KNOW it was a real persons information, i just found it on a free web forum and half the time at least people lie on those forums. the people that actually stole the persons info knew it was real and then had the audacity to post it on web forums. anyways like i said over half the applications information was wrong so clearly i attempted to make a new identity, the banks just are so negliglent they dont care, and if i was charged with attempting to create a new identity, then ok but im not.
Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Ahh the old "it's THEIR fault that I defrauded them" line of thinking!
hey Zigner
explain to me why u think its ok for the the banks/credit card companys to approve an application when more than half the application has incorrect information?
you probably wont answer this directly. ( as u dont want the banks to have to change, and u know that even as the aggravated identity theft act was passed in 2004, identity theft has gone up, not down, so going after pertpatrators hasnt worked)
explain to me why u think its ok for the the banks/credit card companys to approve an application when more than half the application has incorrect information?
you probably wont answer this directly. ( as u dont want the banks to have to change, and u know that even as the aggravated identity theft act was passed in 2004, identity theft has gone up, not down, so going after pertpatrators hasnt worked)
Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
When filling out the application, YOU made the representation that the information was correct
I wonder how much MORE it would have gone up without the law...the increase in identify theft is due to the increased availability of information.
tranquility
Senior Member
This was the point of your original argument. It has been discussed in detail.
Info edit:
As to the others, I think the OP will be charged with underlying felony(s) already. His real concern seems to be this 2 year add-on of prison time for the accusation of aggravated identity theft. If he walked into a bank, he would be charged with burglary too. If he signed forms under penalty of perjury, he would be charged with that or fraud. Online? There are computer felonies which apply too. The OP has not discussed the underlying felonies he is charged with as far as I recall. It is the mandatory time he is worried about.
Last edited:
- Status
Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!
Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">