# Jurisdiction Question



## union1 (Sep 18, 2002)

Im going to give a brief scenerio here, i would like for people to put in their oppinions as to WHOS jurisdiction this crime falls under. 

John Doe works for Filenes Department store in the city of boston. John works as a cashier for Filenes. 

John steals several credit card nubers of some customers on September 3 2003. 

John Leaves work that day and goes home to Dorchester and calls up Western union (which is based in misouri) with the credit card numbers that he took from filenes and makes 3 attempts "1 being successfull for 200.00) at making a cash withdrawal. 

John arranges with Western union to pick up the money in Medford and does so on September 4th.

Now, the 3 jurisdictions that cover this would be (A Fictional Filenes Police Agency, but just assume 1 exists that are designated as SSPO).

Boston Police (Where the call was placed in boston to western union)

Medford Police where John picked up the money. 

I have left out the actual details, Agencies and real places in order to make this question unbiased.


----------



## Gil (Jun 15, 1998)

I would say Boston PD has the jurisdiction. The theft of the numbers was committed in Boston and the fraud took place in Boston (Dorchester). He was only able to pick the cash up in Medford because of the crime he already committed in Boston / Dorchester. Missouri I would think doesn't even come into play in this situation.


----------



## union1 (Sep 18, 2002)

I say the Fictional Filenes Police Agency, because the card number was stolen from Filenes to begin with. anything else is the fruit of that crime.


----------



## Gil (Jun 15, 1998)

Ok but honestly does the "Fictional Filenes Police Agency" have the resources to investigate, follow up and prosecute the case? The crime occurred in a store located in Boston.

How many stores have there own "Fictional Police". CC theft occurs on a daily basis from retail outlets, I can't see BOB's, Home Depot or K-Mart investigating crimes like this and honestly why would they want too?

Maybe if "Filenes" was an institution like a campus or university that actually had their own LE it might be different.

The whole "Fictional Filenes Police Agency" might be throwing me off because I keep thinking retail loss prevention.


----------



## Gil (Jun 15, 1998)

union1 said:


> I say the Fictional Filenes Police Agency, because the card number was stolen from Filenes to begin with. anything else is the fruit of that crime.


Is jotting down a card number an actual crime if it's never used? I would think that the actual crime was committed as soon as the CC number was used to defraud the issuing bank.


----------



## union1 (Sep 18, 2002)

Gil, it is a University Police... I used filenes so I did not have to go into alot more specifics. 

As far as your second post... Thats what im asking, for oppinions as to what crimes were commited and where


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

I would put in a fast call to Boston Det. Steve Blair (think that's the guy)
He's the resident Fraud/Identity theft/Credit scam guy. I'll post more later as I have his card at home.
:wink: 

I say it's a Boston thing..... unless the University has a bona-fide detective division who are competent. They will probably liaison with BPD eventually anyway.
:t:


----------



## Irish Wampanoag (Apr 6, 2003)

Secret Service!!!!! They handle credit card fraud too!!

Boston is the primary agency for your scenario though.


----------



## union1 (Sep 18, 2002)

I cant believe that im the only one who thinks its the University jurisdiction


----------



## LeadDog17 (May 3, 2002)

This may sound stupid, but can't more than one agency have jurisdiction here? There isn't a single crime either.

One crime was stealing the credit card numbers. Another was using them to fraudulently get cash. Third was receiving the dirty money. I'll bet there are more here. 

I'd go with all those agencies mentioned - particularly secret service, although for $200, they might not want to get involved.

"Just my thought, I could be wrong"


----------



## PearlOnyx (Jun 28, 2002)

You'll find that the credit card companies have some good investigative tools as well. I used to be an Operations Manger for a store. Part of my job was loss prevention. So I'd pretty often get calls from an AmEx or Mastercard etc. Investigator looking for information regarding sales and documents related to stolen cards. They'd even at times come out or request copies of the stores video tapes from the times the transactions took place. Our policy was to usually cooperate with them, so they'd get sales receipts and register logs etc. I dealt more with AmEx, but they seemed to really know what they are doing. Although they would not have jurisdiction, perse in this investigation, it may be good to contact these people, as this is 100% what they do all day, and will have a better grasp on who would have jurisdiction and some tips on how to go about your investigation. All and all, it's them who are losing out on the money in the end, because the customer usually gets the money back, if they can prove fraud. That said, they will have a vested interest in helping you out.


----------



## cjm74 (Mar 31, 2003)

Union,
I'd go w/ univ p.o. jusidiction. The act. was committed on ur property. The intent was there. You don't have to have a "det." div in your dept. to solve a crime. I would def. consult w/ Boston for advice, because to minds are better than one. At my employer we only use B.P.D if its totally nec.(ex homicide) Go with it its ur call. Good Luck


----------



## csauce30 (Aug 23, 2002)

Ok...im going to chime in here. I agree with whoever said that there is more than one agency with jurisdiction here. First off, I am aware that we are discussing a crime that was initiated at a University campus, and not Filenes in Boston. But for argument sake, if it were at filenes in Boston, the LP there are SPO's, and BPD would allow Filenes to follow up and prosecute the theft of the credit card numbers, while BPD or Medford would prosecute the actual fraud. BPD does not like to do Filenes work for them, I am speaking from first hand knowledge. 

Now as for the actual crimes we are discussing, the initial offense occured at the university, that gives the College PO's the option to seek criminal complaints for those offenses. They could follow up with Western Union, the credit card companies, and the victims to obtain the necessary information. If they needed additional assistance, as someone said, they could liason with BPD.


----------



## LeadDog17 (May 3, 2002)

Union,
Is someone telling your depatment, errrrr, I mean Filenes, that they DON'T have primary jurisdiction?


----------



## Gil (Jun 15, 1998)

LeadDog17 said:


> Union,
> Is someone telling your depatment, errrrr, I mean Filenes, that they DON'T have primary jurisdiction?


I could only imagine university administration would say such a thing.


----------



## PATS246 (Jun 19, 2003)

cjm74 said:


> Union,
> I'd go w/ univ p.o. jusidiction. The act. was committed on ur property. The intent was there. *You don't have to have a "det." div in your dept. to solve a crime.* I would def. consult w/ Boston for advice, because to minds are better than one. At my employer we only use B.P.D if its totally nec.(ex homicide) Go with it its ur call. Good Luck


----------



## union1 (Sep 18, 2002)

Well there is only one person saying that we dont have Jurisdiction and thats the ongoing debate with me and the chief. Obviously he is going to win this argument, but im just trying to learn for myself and get other's opinions on the issue. This is a touchy issue and im sure that should be discussed at some point among Law Enforcement professionals. 

Here are the facts of what happened now that everyone had chimed in. 

We had an employee who took several credit card numbers to which he was processing for the college. For argument sake (since we dont know when the actual numbers were taken) he left work that day and headed to an address in another part of Boston where he made several attempts at getting cash wired to himself using the stolen card. He wired the Money to Cambridge where he then picked the money up. Now here are the two arguments involved. 

Chief - This is Cambriges Jurisdiction since that is where the Money was picked up. Sole responsibility is on Cambridge for prosecuting this case. (I Do agree with the idea that A crime was committed in Cambridge)

My Argument - This person stole the card from my place with the INTENT of defrauding the cardholder/bank of money. Therefore the crime is now ongoing, He took the Stolen card information to another place and then makes the call to W.U. (The crime of defrauding the owner now becomes a reality, which now becomes the "Fruit" of the inital crime). Then goes to Cambridge and Picks the money up. Picking up the Stolen money in Cambridge I believe becomes receiving Stolen Property in Cambridge. Our designation of SSPO allows us full police authority on the campus, therefore, a crime committed on campus which leaves campus, allows our Statewide Police Officer status to keep jurisdiction while this crime is being committed. 

Does anyone have any input about my argument ?


----------



## csauce30 (Aug 23, 2002)

Im sticking to my original argument that you guys have jurisdiction over the initial crime. If you have the suspect information, seek a complaint at BMC, and let him argue that you dont have jurisdiction. We all know that he's not gonna show for the magistrate hearing or the subsequent arraignment, and a default warrant will be issued. Get the information from the victim, and the credit card company/bank, run it past Cambridge Detectives, and get all your eggs in one basket, then charge him.


----------



## hupd451 (Nov 20, 2002)

Your jurisdiction, no doubt about it. The initial crime occured on you!


----------

