Jail 'Greedy' Scam Victims, Says Nigerian Diplomat

AcidAUS writes with this nearly unbelievable snippet from today's Sydney Morning Herald: "The Nigerian high commissioner in Australia says people who are ripped off by so-called Nigerian scams are just as guilty as the fraudsters and should be jailed. Responding to a story in yesterday's Herald, which revealed Australians lose at least $36 million a year to the online scams, Sunday Olu Agbi said Australians had failed to heed repeated warnings not to deal with shady characters on the internet."

Comments

dumb people lose money, not freedom

[Dan B.]

If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[clarkkent09]

If you are dumb enough to fall for one of the oldest fraud methods in existence, you deserve to lose you money, but not your freedom.

I don't know if it's as clear cut as that. Typically the victims of this scam agree to break the law in some way, in some cases to participate in committing a massive financial fraud. Kind of like those guys who sell crappy speakers dressed up as the expensive ones, and justify the low price by hinting that they are stolen. If the speakers were in fact stolen people would be breaking the law by buying them, so why is it different if they just believe that they are stolen?

No, I don't really think these poor suckers should go to jail, I just don't think it's unbelievable to even suggest that, as the summary says.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[Detritus]

No, they don't deserve to lose their money. Not everyone is born with above-average intelligence and a skeptical view of their fellow man. By definition, a large percentage of the population is stupid. That doesn't mean that they deserve to be victimized by the criminal classes of society.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[Haoie]

I'm pretty sure that Nigerian scams [and its variants] existed before 1992.

The internet just made it a lot more visible.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[ceoyoyo]

Really, they're very lucky. If the scam wasn't a scam they'd be rotting away in some Nigerian jail for money laundering or fraud. Instead, all they lost was money.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[mellon]

It's not just dumb people. It's your mom or dad, if they wind up with some kind of aging-related disease that affects their judgement. Or you, in a few years. Losing everything because of that is a pretty harsh outcome.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[eln]

I just don't get how people are stupid enough to fall for #1. A check is just a piece of paper until it's cashed. Offer to void it and send it back to them through the mail. If they refuse, they're obviously shady, so just hang up. I guess it's the same reason people fall for all scams: they let their greed get in the way of their common sense.

#2 is a little more understandable since people tend to trust people in uniform, but giving anyone the kind of information they would need to steal your identity is just foolish unless you initiated the interaction yourself (say, by calling the gas company directly).

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[statusbar]

A fool and his money are best parted, because the last thing you want in this world are fools with economic power.

--jeffk++

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[Pantero Blanco]

A fool and his money are best parted, because the last thing you want in this world are fools with economic power.

True, but having leeches who live off of others and don't mind wrecking a stranger's life isn't any better.

Someone willing to cheat a fool is probably willing to cheat you too, and there are plenty of fools in positions that will let them do it.

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[GradiusCVK]

1: Entrapment is when a law enforcement official convinces you to break the law. If a drug dealer walks up to you on the street and convinces you to buy a kilo of heroin, you're going to jail buddy.
2: Making a habit out of something is irrelevant. In fact, a person's history of criminality is inadmissible as evidence for or against them (thanks to the Constitution, I think). It may be used in determining their punishment if convicted, but not in determining their guilt. Only evidence relating to their current trial is admissible for that. That said, records of their communications directly related to the current trial are most certainly admissible, and the police would no doubt get a warrant to obtain that obvious source of information.

As far as their attempted fraudulent financial transactions...

...they are illegal. Look up "fraud".

I dunno, IANAL

No kidding... neither am, I but this is pretty basic stuff here. How does something like that earn +5 insightful??

Re:dumb people lose money, not freedom

[jacquesm]

In general there is a really simple rule to protect yourself from scams: If you did not initiate the transaction it is with high probability a scam.

Well said...

[NFN_NLN]

"It's hard to con an honest man."

Re:I guess this has some merit...

[ancientt]

Actually they provide a significant form of revenue. Whoever came up with the lottery was a genius!

"Today we are announcing a state tax on stupi... er, a state lottery!"

Re:You can't jail people for stupidity.

[LighterShadeOfBlack]

RTFA. He isn't suggesting people be jailed for stupidity, he's suggesting they be jailed for willingly aiding in a crime (or at least believing they are).

It's articles like this where the summary has completely missed the point that really highlights just how bad slashdotters are when it comes to reading articles. TFA is short and clear about the what the man was really suggesting and yet already some 90% of (non-joke) comments are about how stupidity isn't a crime.

And shame on the slashdot editor who posted this. I can't believe anyone could miss the point of the article so badly, so either he didn't read it or he deliberately went with a misleading summary for the extra "outrage" comments.

I'll post the pertinent bit here to save everyone the terrible inconvenience of clicking the article link:

In one version, the scammer poses as a government worker who has embezzled millions of dollars and is offering victims a percentage if they help retrieve the money by providing a relatively small amount of money for bribes or other charges.

Professor Olu Agbi said "greedy" Australians who tried to partake in these crimes - even though they are scams - should be arrested as well.

"People who send their money are as guilty as those who are asking them to send the money," he said.

Not so outrageous now is it?

Re:I Will Be Rich in a Few Weeks

[ShadowRangerRIT]

Swing and a miss. Gotta try harder for a Funny mod.

Re:Just to be clear...

[hkz]

Sorry, but the victims are innocent until proven guilty. They haven't _yet_ undertaken anything criminal, just arguably shown intent. I don't want to be a stickler, but that means they get the benefit of the doubt.

He's deflecting Nigeria's stigma

[banffbug]

I somehow doubt he actually believes in jailing these people. He's simply pointing out their guilt, to reduce the guilt of his own country's people.