FBI's Boston office warns New Englanders of rising phone scams
July 29 (UPI) -- FBI officials in New England on Tuesday issued a public warning over an uptick in scam phone calls purporting to be law enforcement in a bid to steal money or other personal info.
The Boston Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation said last year over 17,300 Americans reported as scam victims that saw criminals impersonate government or other law enforcement agencies. Such scams resulted in financial losses totaling more than $405 million.
"We've seen an increase in these scams, which is why we're reminding the public to resist the urge to act immediately and verify who is actually contacting you," Ted E. Docks, special agent in charge at the FBI's Boston Division, said in a statement.
Boston's FBI division says scams impersonating the FBI and other government agencies are "a persistent problem" that can also occur via email.
"Be advised, law enforcement and federal agencies do not call individuals threatening arrest or demanding money," according to federal officials.
They added that scammers can "spoof" caller ID information to make it appear a call is arriving from a legitimate phone number.
Docks said that fraudsters currently are "capitalizing on fear and intimidation" because, he pointed out, "nobody wants to be the subject of a law enforcement investigation."
His office warned possible victims that if a person thinks they are a victim of a scam or suffered a financial loss to "cease all contact with the scammers immediately, notify your financial institutions and safeguard any financial accounts."
According to the bureau, scammer tactics change continually but often share similar characteristics, such as intimidation, using an urgent tone, crypto-related payments, suggesting secrecy or using a supposed emergency situation as leverage.
On Tuesday, the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center said 778 New Englanders from Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire to Rhode Island had reported scams with nearly $13 million in reported financial loses for victims.
In Massachusetts, at least 507 residents collectively lost more than $9.5 million compared to Rhode Island's 67 victims who lost about $147,880.
The FBI said it will never call or email to demand payment, threaten arrest, ask anything related to money or request sensitive personal data. It further suggested to keep all relevant documentation.
"Do not send money to anybody you do not personally know and trust," FBI officials stated. "Never give out your personal information, including your Social Security number, over the phone or to individuals you do not know," they added.
Last year in November the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency raised the alarm over scams that saw fraudsters claim to be federal CBP employees demanding money or other items from victims.Tuesday's FBI advisement came on the heels of April's revelation of a "steady" uptick in the New England region of fraud relating to quit claim deeds.
But the federal government says even if there was no financial loss, "all types of fraud schemes and scams" should warrant a report to the Internet crime division for analysis or referral to aid the public fight against scammers.
Meanwhile, Boston's FBI division advised the public to contact its office at 857-386-2000 if a person is seeking to confirm contact by an actual federal employee, or file an Internet crime report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Business News
27 minutes ago
- Time Business News
Digital Footprints as Evidence: How Online Activity Can Shape Court Cases
The intersection of digital technology and courtroom proceedings has reached a critical juncture, with legal experts warning that Americans' online behaviors are increasingly becoming their own worst enemies in litigation. Recent comprehensive analysis by The Texas Law Dog reveals a startling reality: your digital presence may be silently sabotaging your legal rights, regardless of how secure you believe your privacy settings to be. Legal professionals are witnessing an unprecedented shift in how evidence is gathered and presented in courtrooms across America. What many citizens fail to recognize is that every click, post, and digital interaction creates a permanent record that can be legally accessed and weaponized against them during litigation proceedings. The scope of this phenomenon extends far beyond what most individuals anticipate. Research tracking digital evidence usage across major social media platforms including Facebook, LinkedIn, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok has uncovered compelling statistics that should concern every internet user. Data analysis spanning from fall 2022 through fall 2023 demonstrates that digital evidence played a decisive role in approximately half a million legal cases, fundamentally altering trial outcomes and settlement negotiations. A dangerous misconception pervades public understanding of digital privacy. Many users operate under the false assumption that privacy controls on social media platforms provide legal protection against evidence discovery. This belief has proven catastrophically wrong in countless courtrooms nationwide. Federal courts have established clear precedent regarding digital evidence admissibility. Under established Federal Rules of Evidence, judges consistently rule that relevant social media content qualifies as legitimate evidence, regardless of privacy settings or user intentions when posting. The American Bar Association has documented the systematic approach courts use to authenticate digital evidence, noting that social media posts present unique verification challenges compared to traditional electronic communications like emails or text messages. The authentication process requires courts to examine multiple factors, including potential account access by third parties, the possibility of planted evidence, and the overall reliability of the digital platform. However, once authenticated, this evidence carries substantial weight in judicial proceedings. The practical implications of digital evidence have been demonstrated through numerous high-profile legal cases that serve as cautionary tales for social media users. In the landmark case Romano v. Steelcase Inc. , a plaintiff's claims of permanent, home-confining injuries were completely undermined when defense attorneys successfully obtained access to her supposedly private Facebook and MySpace accounts. The content revealed activities and lifestyle patterns that directly contradicted her sworn testimony about physical limitations. Similarly, the Nucci v. Target Corp. case illustrates how seemingly innocent social media activity can destroy a legal claim. The plaintiff, who sued for significant injuries and emotional trauma following a slip-and-fall incident, was compelled by the court to provide recent Facebook photographs. These images revealed a lifestyle inconsistent with her claimed injuries and emotional distress, ultimately weakening her case and reducing potential compensation. Insurance companies have rapidly adapted to this new evidentiary landscape, deploying sophisticated digital investigation techniques to challenge claims. Adjusters now routinely scour social media platforms for content that contradicts injury claims, seeking evidence of physical activities that appear inconsistent with alleged limitations or emotional states that don't align with claimed psychological distress. This systematic approach to digital evidence gathering has fundamentally shifted the power dynamic in personal injury litigation. What previously required expensive private investigators and extensive surveillance can now be accomplished through comprehensive social media analysis, making it easier and more cost-effective for insurance companies to challenge legitimate claims. Given this evolving legal landscape, individuals must approach their online presence with the same caution they would exercise when giving sworn testimony. Every post, photograph, and interaction should be evaluated through the lens of potential legal scrutiny. Legal experts recommend implementing comprehensive digital hygiene practices, including regular privacy audits, careful consideration of all posted content, and understanding that deletion doesn't guarantee permanent removal. The key is recognizing that your digital footprint extends far beyond your immediate social circle and can be accessed by opposing legal teams with proper court authorization. As Matt Aulsbrook from The Texas Law Dog emphasizes, 'The digital age has fundamentally changed how legal cases are won and lost. Understanding the permanent nature of online activity and its potential legal implications isn't just advisable—it's essential for protecting your rights and ensuring fair legal outcomes.' The message is clear: in today's interconnected world, your smartphone screen might as well be a courtroom window, and every post could become evidence in ways you never imagined. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Chicago Tribune
3 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Storer H. Rowley: Six months into his presidency, Donald Trump has created a police state
Six months into Donald Trump's second term, a lawless president is solidifying his law enforcement powers to create something most Americans didn't vote for and don't want: a police state increasingly robbing residents of their rights and due process. Unaccountable, masked immigration agents, many in plainclothes, are arresting farm workers in fields, raiding Home Depots and car washes, hunting unauthorized workers 'like animals,' and grabbing immigrants in courthouses, mothers and children in their homes, high school soccer stars and kids at baseball practice. Even U.S. citizens have been rounded up by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, including children, and other children here legally seeking refuge, some of them sick, along with their parents in the country without legal permission. Many people snatched are quickly deported without due process. Some are 'disappeared' into detention facilities or shipped abroad before they can get legal representation. This hellscape of fear and chaos does not match up with Trump's campaign promise to mass-deport criminals and arrest 'the worst of the worst.' Residents here without legal authorization with no criminal records pleading their cases dutifully in court have been abducted by agents at courthouses. It is a shameful showcase for the cameras, an authoritarian regime running roughshod over constitutional rights, immigrant rights and human rights. Trump is improperly using the military on U.S. streets, defying court orders, caging detainees in deplorable gulags and dispatching ICE agents to grab anyone they can to meet arbitrary White House quotas of 3,000 a day. He makes a mockery of the rule of law by arresting Americans. Trump is escalating his war on immigrants as poll numbers on his immigration policies hit a record low. Six months in, the executive orders, court challenges, crypto corruption, firings and budget cuts seem bottomless, as well, and now he is grappling with the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. And he's just getting started. Brace yourselves. It's going to get worse before it gets better. Look for the National Guard or the Marines coming next to Chicago. Recently, the GOP-led Senate narrowly confirmed Trump's former criminal defense lawyer, Emil Bove, to a lifetime appointment on the federal appellate bench after he was accused of defying the courts. Bove denied it, but one whistleblower said he told fellow Justice Department officials to ignore court orders if necessary to make sure deportation flights took off, alleging: 'Bove stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts 'f––– you' and ignore any such court order.' To be clear, Republicans and Democrats both agree that illegal immigration needs to be controlled. A bipartisan effort came close to finding a longer-term solution last year until Trump killed the comprehensive reform bill to weaponize the issue against Democrats in the Nov. 5 election. The question is how to do deal with illegal immigration legally and humanely. Americans voted to get the border under control, and to be fair, Trump's administration has done that. Crossings and apprehensions have slowed to a trickle. But they didn't vote for, nor do they support, what he is doing now: lawless crackdowns leaving migrants and Americans alike living in a republic of fear, danger and violence. 'Show me your papers' used to be the catchphrase for villains in World War II movies. Now, it's the harsh reality for many legal residents. Migrants who may have crossed the border illegally but are now going through the court system to plead their cases can be swept up and disappeared before their day in court. Worse, Trump and his top White House anti-immigration adviser, Stephen Miller, deliberately appeal to white nationalists and white grievance, leaving the feeling among immigrants that they are targeted in a deportation war aimed mainly against people of color. His administration has attacked diversity, equity and inclusion programs, and ICE agents have been accused of racially profiling immigrant communities. ICE denies this, but how many white European immigrants do you see in their detention centers? We have seen this pattern before, when whole groups of people are targeted — such as Japanese Americans sent to internment camps during World War II. The inhumane immigration detention center in the Everglades is Exhibit A. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem insists her immigration agents are behaving legally and building cases correctly. She denies racial profiling: 'It's been done exactly how law enforcement has operated for many years in this country, and ICE is out there making sure we get the worst off the streets,' she said. It's not hard to do this legally. Barack Obama and Joe Biden, when they were president, fought illegal immigration within the law. In fact, Obama upset many Democrats by being the 'Deporter-in-Chief,' deporting more immigrants at a higher rate than Trump has — and he did it legally. But Trump's lawlessness and authoritarian conduct goes way beyond immigration, and it has provoked sustained nationwide protests since he took office. He has threatened a number of law firms into submission, tried to quell free speech and dissent at universities, attacked the media with frivolous lawsuits to try to bend them to his will and silence his critics in the entertainment world. But his police state tactics are causing blowback too. Americans who care about their democracy must continue to rally to defend it. Only people power and voters can stop a criminal president. Even his unprecedented weaponizing of the Department of Justice to target perceived enemies has caused revulsion among the ranks over abominations such as his attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. The unit that prosecutes those cases has lost nearly two-thirds of its staff as DOJ attorneys leave rather than further his corrupt attempts to tear down the constitutional system. Trump's approach toward immigratioin has squandered his support. Many MAGA supporters still approve of his actions, but a majority of Americans in a recent CBS poll now see his deportation program as a net negative. Moreover, more Americans now see the value of immigration way more than they did a year ago, with the share wanting immigration reduced dropping from 55% in 2024 to 30% today, according to a recent Gallup Poll — and a record-high 79% of U.S. adults now say immigration is a good thing for the country. Clearly, the police state tactics aren't working, and that's a good thing for America.
Chicago Tribune
3 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Clarence Page: President Donald Trump drives wedges into his own movement
Remember when then-candidate Donald Trump said during an Iowa campaign rally in 2016 that he 'could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters?' I quickly put that aside as just another example of the New Yorker's outlandish braggadocio, but like other political observers, I have since been impressed by Trump's seeming wall of invulnerability to scandal. However, as the Jeffrey Epstein scandal boils up around our ears, I have begun to notice some cracks. The difference is apparent as new questions arise about Trump's relationship with Epstein, the late financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019 while in jail awaiting trial on charges that he had sex-trafficked teenage girls. Instead of calming the waters, demands from skeptical corners of the public have led to more curiosity, particularly from Trump's most deeply committed 'Make America Great Again' base of supporters. The irony for Trump is the fervor of the conviction that Epstein's crimes are the rotten core of the U.S. political power structure. It's a belief that Trump and his surrogates promoted when they suggested that Epstein's political associates were Democrats. It was one of a rich array of conspiracy theories that Trump has used to whip up his populist movement. The MAGA faithful have clung to Trump throughout the many tribulations of his first term and interregnum: the impeachments, the failed insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, the stolen-documents investigation and the sexual assault lawsuit. But that steadfast support seems to be weakening. For example, recent polling from CBS News and YouGov found nearly 90% of Americans — including 83% of Republicans — think the Department of Justice should release all the information it has regarding the case against Epstein. That's the opposite of what Trump, already busy with trade talks, warfare in the Middle East and other challenges, wants to talk about now. After The Wall Street Journal report described a risque drawing that Trump was said to have sent to Epstein decades ago, Trump sued the paper, its owner and reporters. Add to that the Journal's report that Trump was informed that his name appeared in the Justice Department's investigation of Epstein, and it should be no surprise that Americans on all sides of the political spectrum have questions. You could even say that the Epstein scandal has led to one of the most unified moments in recent political history — unified, that is, against Trump's handling of the mess. The discontent shows up in the ranks of his own party, which has been a big source of strength. For example, a poll from Quinnipiac University found that only 40% of Republicans approve of Trump's handling of the release of the files on Epstein, while more than a third of them (36%) disapprove. Quite frankly, if I were advising Trump's campaign, a highly unlikely possibility, I would make a recommendation to which I am confident he would not listen: Stop talking so much. Sure, he can't seem to help himself. Anyone who has been in a press pool covering Trump will tell you that the man loves the sound of his own voice. But this time, Trump's critics in the media are not only coming from the center and left. Some of Trump's usually loyal supporters have been outraged by the possibility that Team Trump is holding out on them or outright misleading them. For example, many were disappointed after the Justice Department said Epstein did not leave behind a 'client list,' contradicting a narrative that has been a mainstay on the right's conspiracy theorists' circuit. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested in February that the list was on her desk, although she later explained, unconvincingly to many, that she was referring to the overall case file. Plus, she said DOJ staff were sifting through a 'truckload' of previously withheld evidence. But the Justice Department ultimately decided not to disclose any more material on the case. That has angered right-wing influencers and other commentators who had been encouraged by no less than the president himself. In July, influential Trumpistas such as Tucker Carlson, Laura Loomer and Steve Bannon were huffing and fuming over the lack of transparency, and some observers wondered whether anger over Epstein would divide the MAGA faithful. Well, I wouldn't bet on it. Democrats and others on the left still have a lot of work ahead to get their own acts — and activism — together. But when I see Trump scurrying around to put out fires in his own MAGA movement, I can't help but wonder how long he can reunite a movement that seems increasingly divided by the array of fears and paranoid notions of which he never seems to get enough.
