It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Courts: Using another's SSN not a crime

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Courts: Using another's SSN not a crime


redtape.msnbc.com

Is using a forged Social Security Number -- but your own name -- to obtain employment or buy a car an identity theft crime? Lately, U.S. courts are saying it's not.

The most recent judicial body to take on the issue, the Colorado Supreme Court, ruled last month that a man who used his real name but someone else's Social Security number to obtain a car loan was not guilty of "criminal impersonation," overturning convictions by lower courts.

That follows a ruling last year by the U.S. Supreme
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 05:51 AM
link   
This is a immigration issue, people are coming here and obtaining fake social security cards with there name but anothers or a randomly picked number on the card. This has always been a crime to use some one elses number, but our Supreme Court ruled in 09 that since these people didn't know who's number they were using that they didn't have the intent to commit a crime.

If I understand this correctly if some one uses my ssn for a job, and lets say they buy cars and property and pays them off I would reap more when I retire and have better credit??

Also if some one uses my ssn for a job and gets loans and doesn't pay them back my credit could be ruined for life and this isn't a crime?

redtape.msnbc.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire

If I understand this correctly if some one uses my ssn for a job, and lets say they buy cars and property and pays them off I would reap more when I retire and have better credit??


Well now there is an interesting angle....


I mean, it isn't a crime and it certainly isn't your fault if you benefit from this somehow; you would be the victim afterall.

*This is definitely worth looking into. Thanks for bringing the matter to our attention.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Just trying to use what I would believe is common sense,
wouldnt this be falsification of documentation?
also forgery?
also theft by deception?

Here's just one example of about 200 that I found within minutes,

Jose Juan Gutierrez-Medina, 31, a citizen of Mexico, is charged with one count of possession of false documents, four counts of aggravated identity theft, one count of aggravated identity theft on an I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification form, one count of misusing a Social Security number and one count of producing a State of Kansas identification bearing his photo and the name of another person. The crimes are alleged to have occurred in March and April 2009, in Sedgwick County, Kan.

Upon conviction, the crimes carry the following penalties:
Possession of false documents: A maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison without parole and a fine up to $250,000.
Aggravated identity theft: A mandatory two years to run consecutively to other sentences and a fine up to $250,000.
Making a false statement: A maximum penalty of five years without parole and a fine up to $250,000.
Misusing a Social Security number: A maximum penalty of five years without parole and a fine up to $250,000.
Producing a false identification document: A maximum penalty of 15 years without parole and a fine up to $250,000.

The Kansas Department of Revenue investigated. Assistant U.S. Attorney Brent Anderson is prosecuting.
www.justice.gov...

This doesnt make any sense!



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:25 AM
link   
S+F for you.
So the place where the guy bought the car most likely ran his credit, but failed to check ID or see that it matched the credit report? I'd be suing the pants off the creditor.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:27 AM
link   
People who do these things are obviously in a pinch due to the state of the economy and probably think it's okay given the conditions. Regardless, poverty or social/legal disadvantage certainly doesn't give one license to break the law and they should be punished. I'm a bit confounded by the court's ruling on this one.

On a side note,I would be willing to bet SS,along with the current credit scoring systems, is going to go bye-bye in our lifetimes. The world economy is a creaking, groaning mess that looks like it might cave inward on itself soon.

Just my two bits,for what it's worth...
edit on 30-11-2010 by FlyingJadeDragon because: Edit for content



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:27 AM
link   
It isn't saying it's not illegal - it is saying it is not 'criminal impersonation'. It might well break other laws, just not the criminal impersonation one.

The title of the thread is really not accurate, IMO.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyingJadeDragon
Think of this way:Is anyone really going to be able to collect any meaningful benefit from Social Security in the near future? Additionally,given the general state of economic affairs and resulting banking policies,do credit scores really mean much anymore? I'm thinking not on both counts.


You sound kinda young and new to the ways of the world.

No offense, you just don't seem to know what you are talking about. Credit scores are important and social security does benefit people and will do so in the near future.


*Are you just jelly of the people with good credit scores who get more from social security than they put in?

edit on 30-11-2010 by Exuberant1 because: I think someone (wink) is jelly....



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Isnt it though?
Criminal Impersonation by definition? (or to a liability!)


18-5-113. Criminal Impersonation.


(1) A person commits criminal impersonation if he knowingly assumes a false or fictitious identity or capacity, and in such identity or capacity he:

(d) Does an act which if done by the person falsely impersonated, might subject such person to an action or special proceeding, civil or criminal, or to liability, charge, forfeiture, or penalty; or
(e) Does any other act with intent to unlawfully gain a benefit for himself or another or to injure or defraud another.

(2) Criminal impersonation is a class 6 felony.




posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


I'm a half century club member and I believe he's pretty accurate in the assessment that SS is going to implode and that the credit scoring debt system is a house of cards ready to crumble as well,
I dont think it's jelly, just some realism as to how much life is left in this corrupt dying system we're currently under,
there's going to be a conversion or collapse, it's just a matter of which shoe hits first,
not enough coming in to take care of whats going out, that's all, just like any other ponzi scheme in it's final days.




posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


I dont think it's jelly, just some realism as to how much life is left in this corrupt dying system we're currently under,
there's going to be a conversion or collapse, it's just a matter of which shoe hits first,
not enough coming in to take care of whats going out, that's all, just like any other ponzi scheme in it's final days.


That's why I think he is young.

Older people will and do 'benefit' from social security. And having good credit is a good thing.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   
wow, i guess this sets precedent for any and all information except your name.


the next time i go to fill something out, my age is going to be 96 my weight is going to be 800 pounds and my eyes are flourescent rainbow.



oh but my name will be correct.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
www.fakenamegenerator.com...

Holy crap!

So I'm bouncing around trying to find info on this because I think it's pretty important and what do I stumble upon?
Have a look see !
How the heck is this even anywhere near okay?
It will even validate your fake ssn for you

This isnt right, at all.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Isnt it though?
Criminal Impersonation by definition? (or to a liability!)


18-5-113. Criminal Impersonation.


(1) A person commits criminal impersonation if he knowingly assumes a false or fictitious identity or capacity, and in such identity or capacity he:

(d) Does an act which if done by the person falsely impersonated, might subject such person to an action or special proceeding, civil or criminal, or to liability, charge, forfeiture, or penalty; or
(e) Does any other act with intent to unlawfully gain a benefit for himself or another or to injure or defraud another.

(2) Criminal impersonation is a class 6 felony.



Well, I wasn't saying I agreed with it, lol! I was just pointing out that the judgement didn't necessarily imply that the use of someone else's SS ID, was not illegal.

What you've posted is interesting - I guess it all must hinge on how you (or more specifically a Judge) defines and interprets 'fictitious identity or capacity'. It seems crazy to me that so many judgements are based on very subtle interpretations, sometimes of a single word, but that seems to be how the system works or in many cases, doesn't work.

edit on 30-11-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


I know, it's crazy right?
Consistency by choice!



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyingJadeDragon
 



People who do these things are obviously in a pinch due to the state of the economy and probably think it's okay given the conditions.


Bullpoo. I had not one but Three people give me incorrect SS# for my 1099's they were independent contractors and did so to get out of paying taxes. All three turned out to be thieves. I am still waiting to go to court on one of these low-lifes.

Where this is going to get really really interesting is in 2012 when the Obamacare regs kick in.



Section 9006 of the health care bill -- just a few lines buried in the 2,409-page document -- mandates that beginning in 2012 all companies will have to issue 1099 tax forms not just to contract workers but to any individual or corporation from which they buy more than $600 in goods or services in a tax year. money.cnn.com...


Boy will that reg plus this court's ruling combine to cause a real mess! Think of all the EIN's I fax to my customers without any proof of accuracy. Think of all the supplies and gas I buy in a year, as much as I can from other small business persons. Think about getting your hands on the EIN's of corporations like Sam's club and Walmart!


Oh boy what fun



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
reply to post by wcitizen
 


I know, it's crazy right?
Consistency by choice!


Yes, take your pick!!

second



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Interesting that you should mention Obama. It had crossed my mind that this judgement may be influenced by the fact that it is known that Obama seems to have used more than one SSN number. Is it possible that to find guilty of 'criminal impersonation' in this case, would open the door for a similar claim against Obama?
edit on 30-11-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Are you all kidding? This is great news. It means that businesses cannot rely on legal protection when using your SS# to verify your identity or allowing your to participate in commerce, etc. If they want to be sure they are protected from fraud, they have to use your less trackable data, like Name, Birthday, mother's maiden name, etc.

I guess the question is. . .is it more important to stop fraud, immigrant or otherwise, or more important to reduce our societies reliance on an easily fraudulated series of numbers?



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


I have actually seen that first hand. We were dealing with a drunk driver. During the field tests we ran his information that was on his Texas drivers license. All of the info was his except for the soc / dl number. His undoing was getting ident/soc numbers for an 80 year old female.

This is just for colorado at this point. There is still the possibility of it going Federal, which will be anyons guess as to how they will rule. Colorado falls in the 10 Federal circuit court, and I dont really recall anything controversial coming from them.

I am curious how this will play out. Also I am wondering if this is a 2 issue poroblem that only addresses one half of it. Almost all states have laws that say you cannot provide false information to an officer during the course of his duties. If you do you can be charged for providing false info. You can also be charged if you give false info and it makes it through the system resulting in conviction.

This article addresses just the impersonation area, which will be refined after this ruling. I am wondering if the judges thought process was the guy was using a false SS number, which is designed to be used for the SS system. All other uses of the SS number evolved from the SS system since it acted as a personal identifier. If the soc number is valid, the guy is actually paying the taxes required for the SS system.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join