Skip to main content

Online Identity Thief Sentenced in Virginia to 14 Years in Prison for Selling Counterfeit Credit Cards Leading to More Than $3 Million in Losses

WASHINGTON – A Hammond, Ind., man was sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., to 14 years in prison for operating an online business that sold counterfeit credit cards encoded with stolen account information, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Tony Perez III, 21, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady. In addition to his prison term, Perez was ordered to pay $2.8 million in forfeiture and a $250,000 fine and to serve three years of supervised release. Perez pleaded guilty on April 4, 2011, to one count of wire fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft.

In his plea, Perez admitted that he ran an online business that sold counterfeit credit cards encoded with stolen account information. According to court documents, Perez utilized multiple online personas in criminal “carding forums,” Internet discussion groups set up to facilitate buying and selling stolen financial account information and other goods and services to promote credit card fraud. In these forums and in other electronic communications over the Internet, Perez regularly purchased or received stolen credit card account information.

U.S. Secret Service special agents executing a search warrant in June 2010 at Perez’s apartment found a counterfeit credit card manufacturing operation and nearly 21,000 stolen credit card numbers and related information in his computers and email accounts. According to court documents, credit card companies have identified thousands of fraudulent transactions using the card numbers found in Perez’s possession, totaling more than $3 million.

The case was investigated by the U.S. Secret Service and was prosecuted by Michael J. Stawasz, a Senior Counsel for the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.
Post a Comment
Read more

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...
3 comments
Read more

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...
Post a Comment
Read more