Identity theft is a crime that is characterized by wrongly acquisition and use of another person’s data in deceptive and fraudulent manner typically for economic or other purposes. In the United States, the Department of Defense prosecutes cases of identity theft and fraud. The congress passed Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act which prohibits the use or transfer and without legal authority a means of identification of another person. The transfer of another person’s data should be unknowingly and with the intention to commit, abet or aid unlawful actions that constitutes the violation of the law or constitutes felony. The offense in most situations carries a punishment of 15 years imprisonment and a fine. It also led to criminal forfeiture of the personal property used to commit the offense.
The World Wide Web has made it possible to obtain another person’s data and use in fraudulent manner without his consent. Unlike fingerprints which are unique for each and every person, personal data especially social security numbers, bank account numbers, telephone calling card numbers and other information if they fall in the wrong hands, they may be used for the wrong reasons and cause considerable damage. In the United States for instance, a lot of people have reported unauthorized persons taking advantage of their personal data and withdrawing funds from their accounts and in the severe cases take their identities all together. They commit other crimes including running up vast debts using the victim’s details.
The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act seek to deter cases of identity theft and impose the maximum possible punishment to violators. The effects are felt in the US and across the whole in that any individual engaged in violation of the law faces maximum punishment possible.
The biggest case of identity theft in the United States happened in 2000 when a credit card company employee called Phillip Cummings of Georgia stole thousands of credit reports and stored them. Cummings was working for TeleData Communications Inc. a Long Island software company that serves banks with computerized access to the credit information database. He obtained credit card information using passwords of the company and sold them to other people approximating 20 in numbers at a cost of $30 for each stolen report. The other thieves either resold the information used the personal bank information or cashed in. Cummings worked for TeleData Inc. for some few months and left the company after which he continued with the theft of credit reports for several months.
The scam victimized more than 300,000 people and is estimated to be worth more than $ 100 million. The first signals of the theft surfaced when Ford Motor Credit realized that they have been billed by TCI for thousands of credit reports they never ordered. Many other companies came up to claim unauthorized bills ranging in thousands.
The victims of the theft suffered significant losses in terms of financial terms and reputation. One of the victims reported a $ 35000 line of direct credit opened in her name while $34,000 was stolen. The victims lost their entire life savings. The victims were, however, reimbursed but the emotional effects were far-reaching and devastating.
Cummings and other engaged in conspiracy and fraud charges and were subsequently arrested, charged in court and finally sentenced to serve 15 years in jail.
The ITADA law in my view is too lenient and did not impose maximum punishment on Cumming. According to the report by Federal Trade Commission ID fraud is a major concern in the United States and is causing consumers and businesses millions of dollars yearly. In 2004 alone 635, 000 cases of fraud was reported and 39% of this cases involved identity theft. Considering the magnitude of losses that companies and citizens go through including emotional and financial consequences in cases of identity theft, Congress should consider revising the law to attract maximum punishment of up to $1 million and life sentence. In this way, offenders would be wary of the consequences hence a reduction in the rate of crime. A fine of 15 years in jail is incomparable to the financial, social, and emotional anguish gone through by 300,000 people.
The prosecutor worked in collaboration with investigating agencies such as the FBI and the Secret Service. In the case, the investigators used the information in the shopping malls to track down the perpetrators. Cumming was first arrested after suspicions arose on why he quitted the job after a few months. Upon being grilled he revealed that he had stolen the identity of thousands of people and sold them to other co-perpetrators at a cost of $30 dollars for each credit report.
The investigating team collaborated with the victims such as Ford Motor to unearth the operation and shopping movement of the criminals. All integrated circuits, microprocessors and computer systems have manufacturing and transaction codes printed on them. Through the use of forensic experts, the owners of the computers that processed the credit transactions were determined. From the codes, it was possible to determine where the reports were printed. This information helped investigators trace the suspects.
The federal identity statute under ITAD found that he committed an identity theft and conspiracy under a number of circumstances including illegally obtaining credit information and selling them other crime perpetrators. During the judgment, he accepted that he acknowledged what he was doing but that he didn’t know the extent of damage his accomplices would cause.
The success of the investigation depended on the evidence presented to the federal of law. Among the challenges encountered include collection of uncompromised and usable digital evidence as well as jurisdiction matters. However, the investigator proceeded in a way that guaranteed unquestionable results. Many cases of identity theft are not solved because of the way evidence is handled by the investigating agencies as well as the conduct of the victims and the companies they work for. In Cummings case, the investigator carried out a thorough investigation that resulted in uncompromised digital and other forms of evidences. In addition, the crime was committed and prosecuted in the state of Georgia thereby eliminating jurisdiction complication.
References
Finklea, K. M. (2010). Identity Theft: Trends and Issues. DIANE Publishing.
Sandra K. Hoffman, T. G. (2010). Identity Theft: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO.
United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Technology, T. a. (1998). The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, and Government Information of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Session on S.J. Res. 512 U.S. Government Printing Office.
Vacca, J. R. (2003). Identity Theft. Prentice Hall Professional.
