SINGAPORE: A retired man who had his bank account information and passwords saved on his computer was defrauded of more than Mho$ 64 000 ( US$ 46 729 ) after a phony technical support representative took control of it.
Later, it was discovered that the funds had been moved to two unidentified man’s bank accounts. & nbsp,
The recipient redistributed the funds among his bank accounts and sent more than S$ 15, 000 to his native India, believing he had been given the money by a” well-wisher.”
Anil Tripathi, a 51-year-old permanent resident of Singapore, was put on trial on Monday, October 16, for one matter of deceptive misappropriation of funds that weren’t his.
He insisted that he had never broken the law and decided against hiring a lawyer to do his own trial through an interpreter who spoke Hindi.
Anil was accused of fraudulently misappropriating more than S$ 15, 000 from the money that was transferred to two of his banks records in June 2020, according to the prosecution’s opening statement.
Bank statements from Anil, according to Deputy Public Prosecutor Gan Ee Kiat, revealed that after receiving the false payments from the scam prey, he redistributed the funds among his bank balances, made cash withdrawals, and sent nearly S$ 16 000 in telegraphic payments to India from abroad.
Anil was” clearly dishonest ,” according to Mr. Gan, when he used the victim’s money for personal gain.
According to Mr. Gan, the accused never had any reason to think that the money that was transferred to him belonged to them.
” When questioned about the exchanges during the course of the investigations, the accused gave an outstanding justification, saying that he believed they were presents from an unknown well-wisher.”
Survivor Describes How He Was Scammed
Chiam Hock Leong, a retired man, was the first defendant in the case.
On June 3, 2020, the 68-year-old man claimed to be using his system in the day. & nbsp,
The computer went plain when I tried to turn it off so that I could go for a quick walk with my wife, and then there were many words running, he said. & nbsp,
Please call this number at Microsoft, there’s a message telling me that your computer is crashing and someone is trying to hack into your transactions.
He claimed that he was in a panic and was concerned that his system might crash, so the man called the number given.
The phone was answered by a man who identified himself as” Shawn” from Microsoft and had an accent from another country.
You now understand why you spend so much money on program, he continued,” because we are here to stop it when someone is scamming into your system.” Therefore, let’s prevent this man from defrauding your system, Mr. Chiam said.
He claimed to be extremely concerned and that he was on the man’s landline. He followed his instructions, including entering his email address, password, and turning off his phone so that the” scammer” couldn’t access it.
Mr. Chiam claimed that he spent two to three hours on the phone with” Shawn.” He claimed that” Shawn” was very amiable and that he was stationed at Cecil Street, that his father had been hurt in the military, and they had traveled to the United States to open a convenience store.
” He engaged me in this conversation, but I was unaware that he was really taking the time to scam me ,” Mr. Chiam remarked.
After a while, Mr. Chiam was ready for dinner because his wife had been preparing in the kitchen while” help” was being provided.
He claimed that” Shawn” had instructed him to” keep your PC( on) overnight” because the issue was” too big” and could not be resolved.
Mr. Chiam claimed that at this stage, he felt compelled to pick up his phone in defiance of the con artist’s advice. & nbsp,
When he did, his banks sent him a long list of messages informing him of various transactions that had taken place and taken money from his account.
He calmed down, called the banks, and told his son-in-law to remove his computer after panicking and feeling” traumatized.”
Mr. Chiam complied. & nbsp,
The attorney questioned Mr. Chiam about how the con artist was able to obtain his bank accounts.
Well, I kept a lot of information in my system, including all of my accounts numbers and passwords, according to Mr. Chiam. And for that reason, I was concerned that my computer may crash and I may lose everything. He most likely did all of these exchanges after gaining access to my accounts and passwords.
On June 3, 2020, Mr. Chiam filed a police statement on the same day. A day or so after, the related bank records were frozen. The remaining sum of more than S$ 15, 000 was not located, even though the officers were able to recover about S$ 49,000 from Anil’s transactions. & nbsp,
Anil was on trial for fraudulently misappropriating this money, which he reportedly transferred to India.
Mr. Chiam declined Anil’s cross-examination when asked if he had ever seen him.
ANIL If Had DONE WHAT?
When Anil received the money, District Judge Koo Zhi Xuan questioned the trial about the best course of action for him.
Anil may have checked the cause of the payments, according to Mr. Gan. Although the attorney claimed there was no proof connecting Anil to the con, he claimed that this event was comparable to someone who discovered a budget on the ground.
He should not have touched any of the funds in either case because he is aware that it is not his, according to Mr. Gan.
He continued by saying that before the false payments were made, Anil’s two bank accounts only had S$ 5 and S$ 62 in them, respectively.
Given the size of the income we see, he doesn’t have any reason to believe it is his, according to Mr. Gan.
The judge subsequently questioned whether Anil ought to have contacted the police regarding the funds. Anil shouldn’t have transferred the money between his bank accounts” at the minimum ,” according to Mr. Gan.
According to Mr. Gan,” He should have called the lender, if not the police, then at the very least, to make a report that he had received these transfers, so that it could confirm that the transfers were legit.”
Deputy Superintendent Lim Kok Seong, who handled the case, served as the prosecution’s next hear.
He asked Anil why he had taken the money without writing checks after getting two remarks from him.
I believed some well-wisher was helping me, so I withdrew some money to pay back the product I owe my friends in India, Anil said in his speech.
He claimed that he was not having any monetary issues and had not given people access to his bank account information.
Anil retorted,” How can I know, sir ,” when asked why the money had entered his accounts.
Anil stated that he was prepared to return the roughly S$ 49, 000 in seized cash to Mr. Chiam and to make reparation for the remaining funds.
Anil questioned DSP Lim during his cross-examination if he had spoken with the agent about paying in installments. DSP Lim acknowledged such a discourse but claimed Anil had never made any compensation despite having more than one year to do so.
Anil even asserted in court that he had disclosed to DSP Lim that his father had been sending him cash transfers in the statement that was recorded.
DSP Lim stated that he would have included it in the affirmation if Anil had done so.
The prosecution goes on.
Deceptive misappropriation is punishable by a jail sentence of up to two years, good, or both.