Slashdot Mirror
Wells Fargo Sued By 63-Year-Old Pastor They Wrongfully Accused of Forging Checks (nj.com)
Wells Fargo has been hit with a lawsuit from a 63-year-old pastor at the United Methodist Church of Parsippany. Wells Fargo sent his ATM photos to the police, which he says led to false arrest, malicious prosecution -- and humiliation. NJ.com reports:
In the lawsuit filed Thursday in Morris County Superior Court, attorneys for the 63-year-old pastor sought unspecified damages against Wells Fargo, which has come under fire over a series of scandals in recent years. Also named were the State Police detectives who originally brought the charges against him last year after bank security officials allegedly mistakenly identified a photo of Edwards taken at an ATM machine as a suspect in a series of fraudulent check deposits....
In the lawsuit, Edwards' attorney wrote that Wells Fargo notified the State Police when it discovered the bogus transactions, and the bank was asked to provide any still photos or video images taken from the ATM at Parsippany where some of the checks were deposited and later cashed out. The bank sent photos of Edwards, who had made his own deposit of checks at the same ATM the very same day, according to the complaint...
The pastor said he first discovered he was the focus of a criminal investigation last year after a parishioner texted him a State Police Facebook posting requesting the public's help identifying a man suspected of depositing fraudulent checks at an ATM... In an interview, Edwards said after seeing the post, he called the detectives and shared a copy of his banking transactions to show he had not deposited the fraudulent checks. "I thought it would clear things up," he said. "They said all their information was from Wells Fargo..." Last September, Edwards said he was asked to come down to the State Police station in Holmdel. After he got there, he said he was shocked to find out he was being arrested and charged with third degree forgery. When he protested and said somebody made an error, he said one of the investigators asked him if the case did go to trial, who would the jury believe -- a bank security expert or him?
"They fingerprinted me. Took my mug shot and gave me a court date," he said.
The case fell apart, but the 63-year-old pastor says he never received an apology from the police, or from Wells Fargo. "The carelessness of both Wells Fargo and the State Police is kind of appalling, and I wonder what happens to somebody who might not have the resources to defend themselves," the pastor told NJ.com. "I told them yes that was my picture and yes I was in the bank that day. That's all they needed to arrest me."
A spokesman for Wells Fargo told the reporter they'd be unable to comment "since this is a pending legal matter." But the story was submitted to Slashdot by someone claiming to be pastor Jeff Edwards. "Wells Fargo carelessly provided ATM pictures [of] me to the state police in a fraudulent check investigation that led to my arrest," reads the original submission.
"The case was dismissed when it was demonstrated that Wells Fargo had been grossly irresponsible."
In the lawsuit, Edwards' attorney wrote that Wells Fargo notified the State Police when it discovered the bogus transactions, and the bank was asked to provide any still photos or video images taken from the ATM at Parsippany where some of the checks were deposited and later cashed out. The bank sent photos of Edwards, who had made his own deposit of checks at the same ATM the very same day, according to the complaint...
The pastor said he first discovered he was the focus of a criminal investigation last year after a parishioner texted him a State Police Facebook posting requesting the public's help identifying a man suspected of depositing fraudulent checks at an ATM... In an interview, Edwards said after seeing the post, he called the detectives and shared a copy of his banking transactions to show he had not deposited the fraudulent checks. "I thought it would clear things up," he said. "They said all their information was from Wells Fargo..." Last September, Edwards said he was asked to come down to the State Police station in Holmdel. After he got there, he said he was shocked to find out he was being arrested and charged with third degree forgery. When he protested and said somebody made an error, he said one of the investigators asked him if the case did go to trial, who would the jury believe -- a bank security expert or him?
"They fingerprinted me. Took my mug shot and gave me a court date," he said.
The case fell apart, but the 63-year-old pastor says he never received an apology from the police, or from Wells Fargo. "The carelessness of both Wells Fargo and the State Police is kind of appalling, and I wonder what happens to somebody who might not have the resources to defend themselves," the pastor told NJ.com. "I told them yes that was my picture and yes I was in the bank that day. That's all they needed to arrest me."
A spokesman for Wells Fargo told the reporter they'd be unable to comment "since this is a pending legal matter." But the story was submitted to Slashdot by someone claiming to be pastor Jeff Edwards. "Wells Fargo carelessly provided ATM pictures [of] me to the state police in a fraudulent check investigation that led to my arrest," reads the original submission.
"The case was dismissed when it was demonstrated that Wells Fargo had been grossly irresponsible."
It's the 'Guilty until proven innocent' game again.
Ok, Wells Fargo made an error.
But it was the police who arrested the guy, instead of just knocking on the door at an appropriate time, and asking some questions.
What on earth was their justification for making an arrest first? Was he considered a flight risk?
The guy's first mistake was thinking he could somehow talk to the police himself and "clear things up". You will never, ever succeed at that. Always consult a lawyer first, and always have your lawyer talk to the police on your behalf. And I haven't seen a link to James Duane's famous Don't Talk to the Police video in a while, which explains why this is the case a lot better than I could in a couple of paragraphs.
The police had evidence (from WF) so they got a warrant from a judge and arrested the pastor. They just chose to disbelieve the pastor's version of events.
Since when did banks start doing neighborhood watch for dangerous individuals? Since when did forging a check correlate to “armed and dangerous”? Since when did banks like Wells Fargo, already well known for scamming their customers, need anonymous cowards to come to their defense?
Because wells fargo provided wrong pictures and the police just went on with it with the premise that he should confess EVEN IF HE WAS INNOCENT because if it went to court he would be railroaded anyways and would get higher charges. he didn't do it but they were so ready to assume that it was him that they probably went more than a little bit too far with just trying to get him to confess.
it's worth suing both the police and wells fargo really, since it's in the usa. that it's in the usa is also why it can cause personal loss worth suing over as well as .. well, that's just what you gotta do in usa.
it's pinpointing a thing that is majorly wrong with the usa legal system at the moment and as such well worth suing for. It is the system trying to coerce you to give up your right for a fair trial(by pleading guilt on whatever they randomly choose as the crime that time) by pressuring on the fear that you will not receive a fair trial.
"you better plead guilty because otherwise you'll be convicted on stuff you didn't do anyways".
a lot of why that system got into the place at is today is the notion that "it only happens to people who deserve it" or that they did something anyways, so who cares, just convict them of something. it's barbaric and stupid. but somehow americans keep voting in people who base their campaigns on just doubling down on the stupidity.
---
and it is mugshot not a comparison photo, that it was him in the photo was never contested. it's not for that purpose. the mugshot and publishing them (before trial) is for shaming purposes, which again seems like a good idea as long as it never happens to you.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Anybody still using Wells Fargo as a bank at this time should be charged - with criminal stupidity.
That is all.
To arrest? Your right but, this is what Ive never understood...
[($)]
Donâ(TM)t take legal advice from internet. Gotcha. The pastor Acted in good faith;) to resolve. The Bank and at least one of the police did not reciprocate. The pastor has grounds for damages and has a fair chance of a decent settlement for his troubles. The police were obliged to arrest but could have been more objective. WF yet another goof up and will cost $. As the saying goes lord works in mysterious ways. Poetic justice. Yes have little faith.
Wells-Fargo is a criminal organization. It has been proven time and time again. At this point, if you're a person who can read, there's literally no excuse to be "banking" with these assholes. I know it sounds like hyperbole, especially considering they're one of the largest commercial banks in the US, but the facts don't lie. They are a criminal organization being run by absolute idiots. Put your money into a local credit union that has a good track record. In the US, where we have laws that favor the largest corporations over individuals, bigger is not usually better.
I don't respond to AC's.
Sadly some bank employees often do not even attempt to analyse anything. They spend the smallest amount of time/effort to finish the task, for example forward some data without validating it.
There are numerous cases where banks freeze people's account for debt recovery, while the original order was on a different person with the same name. You would think this should never happen as there is (on order and in accoint) a lot of additional information that should match in order to validate the order, such as birthdate, official address, ID, yet time and time again bank employees just click on the first account that comes up in "search for first name last name" field in their system.
It takes months to correct such mistake (and get access to your money), as when you raise the problem the bank will go full "let's do it totally formally now like an insurance company" way with YOU having to convince the system it is their mistake.
If he has an account with Wells Fargo then one of the things he had to agree to was mandatory arbitration.
You'd think a pastor would be able to trust that his word would be taken seriously and in good faith, but not even our pillars of the community get the benefit of the doubt anymore.
Why should being a pastor give anyone a pass? Someone who makes their living telling people that they should believe in an invisible man in the sky and a special book and give the church money or they will burn can easily be interpreted as a con man. No I don't really think that this person is a con artist (not intentionally anyway) but I'm puzzled by people who think being a religious leader somehow makes a person automatically trustworthy or a "pillar of the community". If anything I regard religious leaders as more suspect than most because they are selling hope on a false (or at least unverifiable) premise. Many religious leaders abuse the trust placed in them - see how the Catholic church continues to employ and protect pedophiles for a prominent example.
I fully agree that this case was handled extremely badly and that this guy probably is a good and decent person. I'm fully aware that Wells Fargo is a company run by untrustworthy asshats with plenty of evidence to back that up. I don't agree that his choice of vocation should grant him any special privileges any more than you or me. That's how abuses of position and power happen.
The police are not on your side, unfortunately. Don't talk to them without a lawyer, you will get burned.
You are correct that they are not on your side and that you should be very careful in your dealings with them. However it is no axiomatic that you will get burned. Most of the time the cops are decent people trying their best to do the right thing. The problem is you can't tell when they aren't so you have to defend yourself by being careful in your dealings with them because it can backfire horribly if you aren't careful.
You canâ(TM)t make a deposit without using a bank pass. Wouldnâ(TM)t they start with the person associated with that? If this was a stolen pass, why wasnâ(TM)t it blocked? It sounds to me that the bank didnâ(TM)t really look into it.
demand jury trail!
and the 3rd party atm in the quickie mart is in sync 100% or on line 24/7. Some may still be on dial up.
ask are am I free to go? and if they say no then say I want an attorney
Sadly some bank employees often do not even attempt to analyse anything. They spend the smallest amount of time/effort to finish the task, for example forward some data without validating it.
That would make them exactly like some percent of employees in literally every other job you could possibly mention. I have yet to see a company without some percent of employees that fit exactly your description.
Here in the UK - on which much of your American system is based - we have varying levels of "being spoken to" by the police.
Often, the first thing that police will do is ask you down to the station to "assist with their enquiries". This is very much understood to mean that the person could well be a witness, an expert, or just someone who happens to be helpful to the case. If the police say that someone is "helping with their enquiries", it's usually because they either don't have the evidence to actually *point the finger* at someone, or because that person is genuinely helping them.
However, if the police think they've got something on you, they will arrest you and proceed to *interview you under caution*. This is very different to the above; if you're a journalist, you'll be smelling blood at this point.
So for us in the UK, being arrested implies a certain level of guilt, or belief of guilt by the police, even if that doesn't include handcuffs and a prison cell. With that in mind, he's quite right to be upset; the cops didn't even do the most basic of checks before they went from "helping us with enquiries" to "this dude is clearly guilty"
As a side note, plenty of people are arrested here everyday without having to be held captive; in fact most experienced criminals will "come gently", because they will usually be treated as a human being, no matter how bad their crime. Put up a fight on the other hand, and it's the handcuffs and the rough treatment.
Yes, and it would appear that being a man of the cloth provides you absolutely zero credibility these days with regards to that as well.
Why on earth should being a "man of the cloth" provide any special credibility? If anything it should be a strike against them given that they are in most cases literally selling a false and/or unverifiable claims of the supernatural. (those churches get built with real money that came from someone and someone pays the pastor's salary) They get away with it mostly because of social tradition but it's not difficult to make the case that what they are doing fits the description of fraud or at the very least a hoax. I'm not saying this guy is (intentionally) doing anything reprehensible but he doesn't deserve any special trust or credibility just because he preaches on Sunday.
The cops (scum) did try to pressure him -- it doesn't matter, they thought they found a patsy.
The cops are overworked people who get rewarded (promotions, more pay, peer respect) by results. Therefore they will take a two-dimensional view through a three-dimensional person, say "this 2D line fits this image", and stitch you up.
Sometimes that is true and there is evidence to support that point of view in many places. But I happen to be personal friends with a number of cops and that description is not one size fits all. Not even close. A lot of them really are genuine public servants trying to do a good job. Their incentives have been unfortunately warped in an unfortunate direction sometimes but most of them that I've interacted with are aware of this fact and try their best to not be influenced by it when it happens. They aren't robots with no awareness of the social implications of what they are asked to do. It's actually because of that fact that when they do step over the line and start violating civil rights that it becomes that much more inexcusable because in most cases they know what they are doing is wrong.
That kind of retort honestly makes me think that the investigator who said that was involved in a conspiracy to frame the guy.
Who says that except someone who knows that they are lying, or at least consciously realizes there is some significant probability that the information they have is in error.
Nobody with any integrity would ever say "who will the jury believe" when the credibility of their accusation is challenged... they would retort with "we have proof", or something to that effect.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
An attorney in the family told me that the best and most appropriate thing to tell the LEOs is,
"I want to speak to my attorney".
And to say nothing without the presence and counsel of my attorney.
It is better to be more suspicious (in this type of situation) than trusting.
Are not, have not, will not, nor ever will be, Joe citizen's fucking 'friend'. You are the fucking enemy to them, and you always will be. The sooner people get that through their goddamn thick fucking skulls, the better society will become.
You dial 911 and/or interact with them for any fucking reason whatsoever at your own peril. Sad, but true.
As for those Wells Fargo fucks...that company has been a pack of convicted fraudsters and felons for a long time now. Read the court documents from their numerous fucking convictions. The fucking stagecoach robbers simply took up pens instead of pistols and became the 'bankers'. Again, sad but true.
Actually, it isn't!
Bigotry is disgusting -- yours, mine, or anyone's.
As far as I can tell, Wells Fargo is largely a very poorly concealed criminal enterprise.
However the level or respect should be equal. When these community leaders get a free pass, or instant assumption that they are on the side of truth, opens the door further to corruptions. As in I can wear a black shirt with a white collar, and assume that my word over the guy who is in worn blue collar uniform is more truthful.
Police are not judges, they will investigate the crime, this included following leads and the pathway down the innocent.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
in practice it usually means Wells Fargo can drag the case out another few years, adding significantly to the cost. Meaning that even if he wins it'll be a pyrrhic victory where most of the money goes to lawyers. In lawsuits it's not always about winning outright, it's about outlasting the other side.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A Methodist pastor undoubtedly would have preached about forgiveness many times, that being one of the primary Christian principles.
This would have been a perfect chance for the pastor to forgive Wells Fargo and the police. But, NOOOO!
I'd like to listen to his next sermon and see what he has to say for himself.
If he was a black guy, he'd still be in jail!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
The Bible talks about forgiving your brother ... but if you start extending it to companies where does it end? Forgiving bad algorithms? Forgiving viruses? Forgiving bad ideas? Forgiving overly patternized wall paper textures? Forgiving hypothetical mistakes people could have made?
If you can forgive everything it means forgiveness isn't a thing to you.
The age old adage still applies... never talk to the police. The police are law enforcers, they are not there to protect you. Sometimes when they act as enforcers they protect you, but you should never confuse the relationship between cause and effect.
But the story was submitted to Slashdot by someone claiming to be pastor Jeff Edwards.
The 63 year old pastor suddenly joined Slashdot and shared this?
The question should have been "Who's the jury going to believe? A pastor or a bank that has defrauded thousands of people?"
I don't understand this comment from the bank:
...and a bank employee said they couldn't automatically connect photographs with check numbers, but offered to hand write the check numbers on the photos...
Uh, if they couldn't automatically connect photographs with check numbers... what the hell were they writing on the photos? Where did those numbers come from?
Whenever there's a huge police brutality settlement in LA or NYC, it's not the taxpayers paying for it directly, but the city's insurance company. But, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing if citizens periodically saw their "Brutality Tax" rise three quarters of a percent the way they see their sales taxes go up, as they would be more motivated to demand reform.
While Priests, Rabbis, Pastors, Imams, etc have taken a hit in recent years, there is still a certain level of respect that should be afforded to community leaders, especially older ones in good legal standing.
The only difference between a priest, rabbi, imam or whatever else and a conman is that they believe in the shit they're selling.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u