[00:00:00] Speaker A: From fake sweepstakes to stolen millions, this one has it all.
Welcome to behind the Scams, the podcast where true fraud stories meet real world impact.
In today's episode, Nick and Sue take us inside one of the most shocking elder fraud cases ever brought to justice, where an 80 year old woman helped mastermind a $15 million mail scam that preyed on hope and trust.
If you've ever received one of those you've just won letters, you'll want to hear every word.
Stay tuned as we expose how the fraud unfolded, how victims were manipulated, and what you can do to protect yourself and your loved ones.
[00:00:46] Speaker B: Thank you, Miles. Another fine job from our fantastic announcer and hello and welcome back to all our fantastic listeners. We hope you're ready for another great episode of behind the Scams. I'm your host, Nick, and as always, I'm joined by my wife and co host, Sue.
[00:01:06] Speaker C: It's great to be back, Nick. We've got a really important and frankly shocking case to dive into today, don't we?
[00:01:12] Speaker B: Absolutely, Sue. We'll be uncovering the details of a major elder fraud scheme that just saw a recent guilty plea. It's a prime example of how these criminals operate and why vigilance is so crucial. Today we're talking about a significant development in the fight against elder fraud. A Nevada woman, Barbara Trickle, 80 years old, has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud.
This isn't just any case, Sue. It involves a massive prize notice fraud scheme that defrauded thousands of consumers, many of whom were elderly, across the United States and even abroad.
[00:01:54] Speaker C: Wow, Nick, that's. That's a big deal. 80 years old and thousands of victims. That sounds like quite an operation.
[00:02:01] Speaker B: It absolutely was, sue, as always. I obtained a copy of the federal indictment and have been digesting it over the last few days.
These indictments are the best way for us to really know how scammers and fraudsters operate.
According to this indictment, Trickle and her co conspirators were responsible for preparing and mailing millions of fraudulent prize notices.
And the sheer scale of the theft is staggering. They managed to steal more than $15 million from their victims through this scheme.
[00:02:36] Speaker C: $15 million? Oh my goodness. That's just an astronomical amount of what exactly was her role in all of this? I mean, a printer and mailer in an elder fraud scheme sounds pretty specific, right?
[00:02:51] Speaker B: That's where her involvement becomes crucial.
Barbara Trickle was the owner and operator of a printing and mailing business right there in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Her company was essentially the production house for these fraudulent Prize notices.
She personally supervised the entire process. The lasering, the printing and the mailing of these deceptive materials.
[00:03:17] Speaker C: So she wasn't just like a minor player who accidentally got caught up in it. She was actively overseeing the creation and distribution of the fraudulent mailings.
[00:03:27] Speaker B: Exactly.
She was an integral part of the machinery behind this scam.
The operation ran for quite a. Quite a while, too.
From 2012 all the way up to February 2018.
That's a good six years of this ongoing deception, preying on vulnerable individuals.
[00:03:48] Speaker C: Unbelievable. Six years. And you mentioned prize notice fraud. Can you briefly explain what that entails? For our listeners who might not be familiar, how did they trick people into thinking they'd won something?
[00:04:03] Speaker B: Of course, Sue. It's a classic setup, really. These fraudulent notices would lead victims to believe they had been individually selected to receive a large cash prize. But there was always a catch, of course. To claim their so called winnings, they just had to pay a small fee, typically ranging from $20 to $50.
Typical scammer bait. Dangle a large carrot in front of them for the ultimate reward and but slip in a fairly reasonable advance fee. I mean, what do you have to lose, right?
[00:04:36] Speaker C: Wait, hold on. Are you saying they actually believed they'd won a huge cash prize and then willingly sent money for it? That's crazy. How do people fall for that? I mean, it sounds so simple.
[00:04:50] Speaker B: It does, sue, but scammers are incredibly convincing.
They prey on hope and sometimes desperation.
These notices were designed to look very official and personal, making people believe this was a legitimate opportunity.
The key was that the victims were led to believe they were individually selected.
That personal touch, combined with the allure of a large sum of money, can be incredibly powerful.
[00:05:20] Speaker C: Such. So it wasn't just a generic flyer. They actually tried to make it look like it was specifically for them.
[00:05:26] Speaker B: Exactly. The notices often contained false statements implying they'd won big, like $749,251 in sweepstakes cash and awards. And that it was 100% confirmed.
They'd use terms like confirmed, validated, or guaranteed to really drive home the legitimacy.
[00:05:51] Speaker C: Oh, wow. I didn't know that. So they were explicitly told they'd already won. Not that they might win.
[00:05:58] Speaker B: Precisely. They were told they had won and just needed to pay this small processing fee to receive their prize.
It wasn't a sweepstakes entry. It was presented as a prize notification.
And to make it seem even more credible, the mailings often featured official looking seals and stamps.
[00:06:20] Speaker C: Ugh, that's so sneaky. What did they actually get after sending their money. I can't imagine it was that big cash prize.
[00:06:27] Speaker B: Oh no, really? Not even close.
In reality, no victim ever received a large cash prize from Trickle or her co conspirators.
Instead of what victims typically received was a report describing sweepstakes opportunities.
Basically publicly available information they could have found themselves. Or a trinket of minimal, almost negligible value.
[00:06:53] Speaker C: A trinket? Like what kind of trinket? A plastic whistle, A cheap pen?
[00:06:58] Speaker B: Well, the indictment mentions items like an ultra HD smart TV or a Kenmore Elite washer and dryer or or heirloom jewelry in their disclosures. But these were misleading. The actual value of what was sent, if anything, was minimal. It was a complete bait and switch.
The small print. The disclosures, as they called them, would state that the recipient was entering a sweepstakes or would receive these items. But these disclosures did not correct the false statements that were front and center on the notices.
[00:07:37] Speaker C: Oh my goodness. That's just beyond frustrating. So they'd pay their $20 to $50, expecting thousands, and get a pamphlet about other sweepstakes or some junk. That's just adding insult to injury, isn't it?
[00:07:53] Speaker B: Absolutely. And here's where it gets even more insidious. Once victims responded to one fraudulent prize notice mailing, Trickle and her co conspirators would inundate them with additional fraudulent mailings. They knew these individuals were susceptible, so.
[00:08:10] Speaker C: They essentially identified their most vulnerable targets and then just kept hitting them. That's just terrible. And where were these payments sent? Were they asking for bank transfers or something equally direct?
[00:08:23] Speaker B: Good question.
The mailings included return envelopes addressed to several post office or PO boxes located outside of Nevada, which were rented by the defendants.
So victims would mail their payments, cash or checks to these P.O. boxes.
It was all designed to be a very structured, large scale operation using the postal service to their advantage.
It really highlights how these sophisticated schemes leverage everyday systems to facilitate their fraud.
[00:08:56] Speaker C: Okay, so who are we talking about? The press release mentioned Barbara Trickle, who pleaded guilty. Was she the only one?
[00:09:04] Speaker B: No, not at all. Sue. Barbara Trickle, an 80 year old woman from Las Vegas, was indeed a central figure pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. But she wasn't alone. This was a collaborative effort involving at least two other main co conspirators. And Kimberly Stamps and John Kyle Muller.
[00:09:26] Speaker C: Interesting. So how did they all fit together? Was it like a crime family or more of a business partnership?
[00:09:34] Speaker B: That's a great question. And it turns out there were familial ties involved. Kimberly Stamps and John Kyle Muller were actually sister in law and brother in law.
[00:09:43] Speaker C: Oh, wow. I didn't know that.
So it was a family affair in a way.
That just adds another layer to this.
[00:09:52] Speaker B: It does. And their roles were quite distinct, but interconnected.
Let's start with Barbara Trickle, since we've already mentioned her. She was the owner and operator of a printing and mailing business in Nevada. Her business was essentially the engine producing these fraudulent prize notice mailings.
She personally supervised the lasering, printing and mailing of these notices.
She even directed her employees to analyze victim response data, which, as we'll see, was crucial for them.
[00:10:26] Speaker C: So she was the one physically getting these millions of letters out the door. That's a huge undertaking for one business. And she was also analyzing data. That sounds more involved than just a simple print shop.
[00:10:39] Speaker B: Absolutely. She wasn't just a vendor. She was deeply integrated into the scheme.
She was paid by her co conspirators for these services, making her an active participant, not just an unwitting third party.
[00:10:54] Speaker C: Okay, so Trickle handled the physical production and mailing. What about Kimberly Stamps, her sister in law? What was her role?
[00:11:02] Speaker B: Kimberly Stamps, who resided in Gilbert, Arizona, was essentially the brain behind the mass mailing prize notice scheme.
She was the owner and operator of the larger enterprise, running it under various names like JKS Ventures, JJMK Enterprises, and KPS Productions. Stamps was a partner in the scheme and received a significant share of the profits. Her responsibilities were extensive.
[00:11:30] Speaker C: Oh, so she was really running the show, setting up the different company names and everything?
[00:11:34] Speaker B: Precisely.
She purchased consumer mailing lists to identify potential victims, chose which fraudulent prize notices to send out based on effectiveness, coordinated with printers like Trickle and translators, and even ordered the cheap fulfillment items that were mailed to victims instead of cash.
[00:11:56] Speaker C: So she was handling the entire logistics chain, from finding victims to deciding what fake prize they'd get.
[00:12:03] Speaker B: That's right. She also supervised the processing of victim responses, tracked victim response rates to see what was working, and perform many other critical tasks to keep the scheme running smoothly. It was a very organized criminal enterprise.
[00:12:20] Speaker C: And then there's John Kyle Mueller, the brother in law. What part did he play in all of this?
[00:12:26] Speaker B: John Kyle Muller, who resided in Boulder, Colorado, was also a partner in the scheme and like Stamps, received a share of the profits. His primary role revolved around the content itself. He reviewed, edited and approved the fraudulent prize notices before they were even mailed out.
So he was ensuring the deceptive language was as convincing as possible.
[00:12:52] Speaker C: So he was the wordsmith crafting the lies. And he also got a Cut of the profits.
[00:12:57] Speaker B: Exactly. He also directed Stamps and other co conspirators to analyze the victim response data, much like Trickle was doing, and to perform other tasks to further the scheme. So while Stamps was the logistical mastermind and Trickle was the production arm, Mueller was the quality control for the deception, ensuring the mailings were effective.
[00:13:20] Speaker C: Wow. So it was a truly collaborative effort. In each with their own specialized role. And they were all connected by family ties. That's a pretty tight knit criminal operation.
[00:13:32] Speaker B: It certainly was.
The indictment makes it clear that they knowingly and willfully combined, conspired and agreed with each other.
Their object was simple. To enrich themselves by causing victims to send payments in response to these materially misleading prize notifications. And then, of course, distributing those payments among themselves and others.
[00:13:59] Speaker C: It sounds like a well oiled machine. Unfortunately for the victims. How long was this operation running? Given how elaborate it seems, this scheme.
[00:14:09] Speaker B: Operated for quite a long time.
From 2012 all the way until February 2018, which is when the US Postal Inspection Service executed multiple search warrants and the Justice Department finally obtained a court order to shut down the fraudulent mail operation.
So we're talking about six years of continuous systematic fraud. The mailings were incredibly deceptive, designed to appear legitimate and authoritative. They weren't just generic spam. They. They were crafted to look like official notices.
[00:14:45] Speaker C: Really? Like what were they, just plain letters?
[00:14:47] Speaker B: Far from it. They used specific tactics. For example, many of them had titles like Attention.
[00:14:55] Speaker C: Wow, that's so direct. And I mean, almost threatening in a way. Like they've been looking for you.
[00:15:00] Speaker B: Exactly. They used language intended to create a sense of urgency and importance.
They also pretended to be from corporate organizations with official sounding names, like Winners, Search Advisory, Office of the Registrar, Funding Division, or Premium Award Center.
[00:15:19] Speaker C: Oh, no. Really? So they sounded like real government agencies or big corporations? That's crazy. How do people fall for that?
[00:15:27] Speaker B: Well, they went further.
Many of these mailings purported to be signed by individuals with official titles like board chairman, Chief of administration, or comptroller. The thing is, these individuals didn't actually exist. They were entirely fabricated.
[00:15:45] Speaker C: That's so deceptive. So they're creating this entire fake bureaucracy to lend credibility to the scam.
[00:15:52] Speaker B: Precisely. And they also made them appear highly personalized. Your name, for instance, would often appear multiple times throughout the letter, making. Making it seem like it was specifically for you. But in reality, they were just form letters with merge fields. They'd include unique identification numbers or claim numbers, asking the recipient to confirm they were indeed the identified winner.
[00:16:22] Speaker C: Wait, hold on. Are you saying they Were creating unique numbers for each victim. That's a lot of work.
[00:16:28] Speaker B: It certainly is, but it adds to the illusion of authenticity. They also included official looking seals and stamps, which appeared to have been applied by hand, Further enhancing that sense of legitimacy.
It's all about creating an atmosphere where the victim believes this is a real important document, so they put all this.
[00:16:50] Speaker C: Effort into making it look real. But what did they ask for? That's where the scam comes in, right?
[00:16:56] Speaker B: That's where the hook came in. To receive the award, the mailings instructed recipients to return a small fee. This fee was typically between 20 and $50. Along with a response card. They'd even include a return envelope Addressed to one of several P.O. boxes they rented, Often outside of Nevada, to throw off suspicion.
[00:17:18] Speaker C: 20 to $50 doesn't sound like a lot, but when you're promised a huge prize, I can see why people might think, oh, it's just a processing fee.
[00:17:28] Speaker B: Exactly. It's a low enough barrier to entry that it doesn't immediately trigger alarms for everyone, Especially if they genuinely believe they're about to receive a massive cash prize.
The mailings would often state that recipients were confirmed, validated, guaranteed, or approved for their prize.
[00:17:50] Speaker C: And then what did they actually send? I assume it wasn't the millions they promised.
[00:17:54] Speaker B: No, not at all. Instead of a large cash prize, Victims typically received a report describing publicly available sweepstakes opportunities they could enter. Or sometimes just a trinket of minimal value. We're talking about things like cheap jewelry Or a booklet of generic information you could find online.
Some mailings would claim they were entering a sweepstakes for a smart TV or a washer and dryer. But again, these were rarely, if ever, delivered.
[00:18:25] Speaker C: Oh, wow. So it was almost nothing. And they didn't even try to hide it. What about disclosures?
[00:18:33] Speaker B: They did include disclosures buried in the fine print. But these disclosures did not correct the false statements and misrepresentations Described on the front of the notices.
They were intentionally misleading, Designed to protect the scammers legally While still tricking the victims with the prominent, bold claims.
[00:18:58] Speaker C: So they were basically saying one thing in big letters and then contradicting it in tiny, almost unreadable text. That's just so manipulative. And it's like they were creating a legal loophole for their own fraud.
[00:19:12] Speaker B: It's a classic tactic. They leverage human psychology, the desire for a windfall, and the trust people often place in what looks like official correspondence.
They create this elaborate illusion of a legitimate prize, Knowing that most people won't scrutinize the fine print until it's too late. It's truly a sophisticated level of deception.
[00:19:35] Speaker C: So they put all this effort into making it look real, but what did they ask for? That's where the scam comes in, right?
[00:19:41] Speaker B: Yes.
Instead of a large cash prize, victims typically received a report describing publicly available sweepstakes opportunities they could enter. Or sometimes just a trinket of minimal value.
You know, the stuff we commonly refer to as junk?
Pure junk.
[00:20:01] Speaker C: Oh, wow. So it was almost nothing. Probably just stuff we can all get at the dollar store. But instead of a dollar, it costs 20 to $50.
[00:20:12] Speaker B: Great analogy, sue, but you're right on the money.
[00:20:15] Speaker C: I am sure most of us have seen those exact junk letters in our mail. You know, the ones with big letters on the face that make you want to open it right away. I mean, I've seen them a million times.
The most they get me to do is open it before I toss it. My biggest decision after that is whether to put it in recycle or in the trash.
[00:20:36] Speaker B: It's a classic tactic. They leverage human psychology, the desire for a windfall, and the trust people often place in what looks like official correspondence.
They create this elaborate illusion of a legitimate prize, knowing that most people won't scrutinize the fine print until it's too late. It's truly a sophisticated level of deception.
[00:21:01] Speaker C: Okay, so victims are sending in 20 to $50 at a time for these worthless prizes.
But this scheme operated for years, as we mentioned earlier, from 2012 to 2018.
Nick, how much money are we talking about in total?
[00:21:20] Speaker B: This.
[00:21:21] Speaker C: That these scammers managed to steal.
[00:21:23] Speaker B: That's where the numbers become truly staggering. Sue, the indictment states that trickle and her co conspirators used this scheme to steal more than $15 million from their victims.
[00:21:34] Speaker C: Wait, $15 million? Oh, my goodness. That's not just a few people falling for a trick. That's thousands, if not tens of thousands of victims.
[00:21:43] Speaker B: Exactly. And many of whom were elderly and making them particularly vulnerable. Imagine sending in 20 or $50 repeatedly, sometimes multiple times, genuinely believing you're about to receive hundreds of thousands or even millions, only to get a virtually worthless item or a printout of sweepstakes you could find online for free. It really adds up.
[00:22:07] Speaker C: It's heartbreaking to think about the financial and emotional toll on those videos victims. They were promised these life changing sums of money, like the $1,500,000 sweepstakes cash we mentioned, or even the $749,000 as some mailings claimed. And what did they get? A cheap trinket or a report? The contrast is just unfathomable.
[00:22:34] Speaker B: It is. The scale of the deception is immense.
While the individual fee was small, the sheer volume of mailings and the number of victims across the United States and abroad allowed them to accumulate such a vast sum. They exploited hope and for many, a genuine need for financial relief.
[00:22:55] Speaker C: So to recap, people paid between 20 and $50, believing they were getting a huge cash prize.
[00:23:03] Speaker B: And?
[00:23:04] Speaker C: And in return, they got nothing of value.
Not a cent of the promised millions, nor the smart TVs or high end appliances.
Just a report or a trinket.
[00:23:17] Speaker B: That's correct. No victim ever received a large cash prize. The entire operation was designed to extract those small fees which collectively amounted to a fortune for the conspirators.
It's a prime example of how small amounts, when multiplied by thousands of victims, lead to massive illicit gains.
[00:23:38] Speaker C: Wow. Just thinking about that 15.5 million figure and the false promises behind really underscores the importance of our next segment, which I assume will delve into how they managed to follow this money trail so that they put all this effort into making it look real. But what did they ask for? That's where the scam comes in, right?
[00:24:02] Speaker B: Exactly. It's a low enough barrier to entry that it doesn't immediately trigger alarms for everyone, especially if they genuinely believe they're about to receive a massive cash prize.
The mailings would often state that recipients were confirmed, validated, guaranteed or approved for their prize.
[00:24:25] Speaker C: Wow. That's six years. Six years of constantly mailing out these fraudulent notices and collecting money from victims. How did they manage to keep it going for so long without getting caught sooner?
[00:24:37] Speaker B: That's a great question. And it speaks to the deceiving nature of these long running schemes.
They relied on a high volume of mailings and a relatively small amount per victim, which can make detection harder.
Plus they were always adapting.
But what's truly astonishing is their persistence.
The indictment specifically mentions that despite frequent inquiries and complaints from victims, the Better Business Bureau and other entities, and even an enforcement action by the U.S. postal Service against the scheme, the defendants continued their operations.
[00:25:18] Speaker C: Oh no. Really?
So even when they knew they were being investigated, or at least had complaints piling up, they just kept going? That's crazy. How do people fall for that when there are red flags already popping up for the scammers themselves?
[00:25:37] Speaker B: I know it sounds unbelievable, but scammers are incredibly brazen.
The documents state they did not meaningfully alter their practices.
They were making so much money that they likely Felt they could absorb some of these inquiries or minor enforcement actions. It's a calculated risk on their part, Weighing the potential consequences against the immense profits.
[00:26:02] Speaker C: So the U.S. postal Inspection Service must have been on their tail for a while before they finally shut it down in 2018.
[00:26:09] Speaker B: That's right. The press release confirms that the USPIS executed multiple search warrants in February 2018, and the justice department obtained a court order to finally shut down the fraudulent mail operation.
This wasn't a sudden discovery. It was the culmination of years of investigation.
[00:26:29] Speaker C: It makes you wonder how many victims they could have defrauded during those early warning signs if the complaint, complaints and initial enforcement didn't deter them.
[00:26:38] Speaker B: That's precisely the concern.
The conspirators, Trickle stamps and Mueller were fully aware of the issues.
The indictment reveals that Mueller, for instance, analyzed victim response data and advised stamps on how to handle inquiries and complaints from victims. They were literally tracking the feedback, not to stop, but to refine their scheme and continue to exploit more people.
[00:27:05] Speaker C: That's chilling. So they were basically weaponizing the feedback against the victims, using it to get more effective. It sounds like a constant game of cat and mouse with the victims largely unaware they were even playing.
[00:27:17] Speaker B: Exactly.
They used the victim response data to target them for follow up mailings and to assess which prize notices were most effective.
Think about that for a second. If a certain mailing generated more responses, they'd double down on that type of deception.
It wasn't about avoiding detection.
It was about maximizing profit, even in the face of scrutiny.
[00:27:43] Speaker C: So for six years, they perfected their methods, continued to lure in more victims, all while knowing they were likely on some kind of rapid radar. It just goes to show how determined these fraud rings can be. It's not just a fly by night operation. This was a well oiled machine of deception.
[00:28:04] Speaker B: A very well oiled machine. Unfortunately, the duration and the persistence despite external pressures, truly highlight the level of organization and criminal intent behind this scheme.
It wasn't just a few bad actors.
It was a sophisticated operation designed to withstand attempts at disruption for as long as possible.
So we've talked about the incredible persistence of this scheme, but let's get into the nitty gritty of how they actually collected the money.
Because, I mean, it wasn't just a matter of sending out a letter and hoping for the best, Right?
[00:28:42] Speaker C: Right. I'm picturing an elaborate system.
How did they get these millions of dollars from thousands of victims into their pockets? Where did all that money go first?
[00:28:53] Speaker B: Excellent question. And the indictment lays it out pretty clearly, the first step was the victims sending their payments.
These payments, primarily checks and cash, were sent via the return envelopes provided in the fraudulent mailings.
And these return envelopes, they were addressed to P.O. boxes.
[00:29:14] Speaker C: P.O. boxes in Arizona, if I recall from the document.
[00:29:17] Speaker B: Exactly. According to the indictment, these PO Boxes were located in Arizona. And it was Kimberly Stamps, one of the key conspirators, who, along with others, collected the victim mail from these mailboxes. She'd then open and sort the victim responses, often doing this from her home or office space.
[00:29:38] Speaker C: Wow. So she was literally sifting through bags of mail, counting cash and looking at checks. That's so hands on for such a massive scheme.
[00:29:50] Speaker B: It certainly was. And initially it was quite an operation for handling those checks.
Up until September 2016, stamps would send the victim checks to a Canadian payment processor.
This processor would deposit the checks into its own accounts and then wire the proceeds back to bank accounts controlled by Stamps upon her request.
[00:30:14] Speaker C: Wait, hold on. A Canadian payment processor? That sounds like an extra layer of complexity, maybe to make it harder to trace.
[00:30:21] Speaker B: That's exactly right, Sue. It adds an international element which can complicate investigations and make it tougher for authorities to follow the money trail.
It's a common tactic in larger, more sophisticated fraud operations to try and obscure the origin and destination of funds.
But after September 2016, the system changed slightly.
Stamps began depositing victim checks into her own local bank accounts.
[00:30:52] Speaker C: So they moved from an international middleman to directly depositing the funds.
Did that mean they were feeling more confident or perhaps getting sloppy?
[00:31:01] Speaker B: It's hard to say definitively from the documents, but it could indicate either a streamlining of their operations or perhaps a perceived reduction in risk.
Regardless, once the money, whether cash or processed checks, was in accounts controlled by Stamps, she would then distribute parts of these proceeds to herself and and her co conspirators, including Barbara Trickle and John Kyle Muller.
[00:31:29] Speaker C: So it was essentially a three way split or more, depending on who else was involved. And this was happening for years.
[00:31:35] Speaker B: Precisely. And this leads us to another fascinating and chilling detail about their operation.
The use of a victim database.
The indictment states that Stamps and her employees would scan a barcode at the bottom of each paying victim's response slip.
[00:31:53] Speaker C: Oh, a barcode. What was that for?
[00:31:55] Speaker B: That barcode was crucial.
It caused information about that victim to be uploaded into a database.
And here's where Barbara Trickle comes back into play. Beyond just the printing, this database was actually maintained by Trickle.
Stamps could even access it remotely.
[00:32:15] Speaker C: That's crazy. So they weren't just mass mailing blindly. They were building a profile of their victims.
[00:32:22] Speaker B: Exactly. And this database wasn't just for record keeping. It was a tool for exploitation. The defendants Stamps, Mueller and Trickle used this database to target the same victims repeatedly with more prize notification mailings. It wasn't a one and done scam for them.
[00:32:42] Speaker C: Oh, wow. I didn't know that.
So if you fell for it once, you were essentially flagged as a prime target for future scams from them. That's what I would call double deception tactics. Absolutely disgusting.
[00:32:56] Speaker B: It is.
The documents explain they used it to assess which prize notices were most effective. If a particular type of mailing got a high response rate, they'd use that data to refine their approach and hit those same vulnerable individuals again and again.
And remember, what did these victims get in return for their payments?
[00:33:21] Speaker C: A report describing sweepstakes opportunities or a trinket of minimal value, not the large cash prize they were promised.
[00:33:30] Speaker B: Correct. So the database not only helped them retarget, but. But it also helped them understand how to keep the deception going. By knowing which tactics hooked victims most effectively, it paints a picture of a highly organized, data driven criminal enterprise.
[00:33:49] Speaker C: I mean, that's almost like a legitimate marketing strategy, but for fraud, it's terrifyingly effective. When you think about it, it makes you realize just how sophisticated these operations can.
[00:34:01] Speaker B: Absolutely.
It highlights the depth of their planning and their cold calculation in extracting as much money as possible from their victims, many of whom, as we know, were elderly and vulnerable.
It really solidifies that this was far from an amateur operation. But there is good news in this story, and that is law enforcement eventually caught up with Barbara Trickle.
[00:34:28] Speaker C: That's the good news we've been waiting for.
So what exactly was the outcome for Barbara Trickle? What did she plead guilty to?
[00:34:36] Speaker B: Well, the press release states quite clearly that Barbara trickle, who is 80 years old and from Las Vegas, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud.
This isn't a small charge. It's a significant one that encompasses the entire scope of the fraudulent scheme we've been discussing.
[00:34:59] Speaker C: Conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. So it's not just about her direct actions in printing, but also her involvement in the overall plot.
[00:35:09] Speaker B: Right Again, Sue. The conspiracy aspect means she agreed with others like Kimberly Stamps and John Kyle Mueller to commit these crimes. And mail and wire fraud, and as we saw in the indictment, are the core methods they used to execute the scam. Sending fraudulent mailings and using interstate communications for coordination and financial transactions.
[00:35:33] Speaker C: And this conviction is quite significant, isn't it? I mean, she was the owner and operator of the printing business.
So she was crucial to the physical execution of the fraud.
[00:35:44] Speaker B: She was absolutely critical.
Her printing and mailing business was the engine that produced those millions of fraudulent prize notices.
Without her or someone like her, the scale of this mass mailing operation wouldn't have been possible.
She supervised the lasering, printing and mailing of these notices.
This plea really underscores that even those who might see themselves in as simply providing a service to fraudsters can and will be held accountable for their role in the criminal enterprise.
[00:36:23] Speaker C: Oh, wow, I didn't know that. That's a powerful message that if you're enabling a scam, you're just as liable.
So with this guilty plea, what are the next steps for her? What kind of consequences is she facing?
[00:36:38] Speaker B: While the specific sentence was will be determined later, a guilty plea to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud under federal law carries significant penalties.
We're talking about potentially years in prison, substantial fines, and importantly, forfeiture of assets.
The indictment details a forfeiture allegation, meaning the government seeks to seize seize any property derived from or traceable to the proceeds of the fraud.
[00:37:11] Speaker C: So they want to get the money back from her. That makes sense. Over $15 million was stolen, right?
[00:37:18] Speaker B: Precisely. The goal is to recover those illicit gains. The indictment explicitly mentions that upon conviction, they would seek forfeiture of any and all property with the requisite nexus to violations of the mail and wire fraud statutes and a criminal forfeiture money judgment for at least the amount to be calculated. It's the Justice Department's way of ensuring that criminals don't profit from their illegal activities.
[00:37:45] Speaker C: That's a huge relief, especially for the victims.
Knowing that the people behind these schemes are being brought to justice and that there's an effort to recover some of the stolen funds offers a glimmer of hope.
What was the catalyst for the shutdown of this whole operation leading to these charges?
[00:38:06] Speaker B: The press release states that the fraud scheme operated from 2012 until February 2018.
That's when the U.S. postal Inspection Service, or USPIS, executed multiple search warrants and the Justice Department then obtained a court order, effectively shutting down the entire fraudulent mail operation.
This plea really highlights the power of interagency cooperation in tackling these complex large scale fraud cases.
It shows persistence pays off. This conviction sue really underscores the immense efforts being made by agencies like the Department of Justice and the the U.S. postal Inspection Service to combat elder fraud on a much larger scale. It's not just about one case. It's about a nationwide and even international fight to protect our most vulnerable citizens.
[00:39:06] Speaker C: It certainly feels like the Justice Department is putting a huge focus on this, doesn't it? I mean, these cases seem to pop up more and more unfortunately.
[00:39:16] Speaker B: They absolutely are.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Yakov Roth from the Justice Department's Civil Division stated, and I quote, the Department of Justice's Consumer Protection Branch is committed to protecting elderly consumers from fraudulent mass mailing schemes.
He also specifically extended gratitude to the Postal Inspection Service for their thorough investigation in this matter. It really highlights the interagency cooperation.
[00:39:48] Speaker C: That's fantastic to hear. And what about the Postal Inspection Service directly? What's their commitment to this kind of work?
[00:39:55] Speaker B: Inspector in Charge Eric shen of the U.S. postal Inspection Service Criminal Investigations Group echoed that sentiment powerfully. He said, and I'll quote him directly here, the U.S. postal Inspection Service will continue to aggressively investigate mass mailing schemes and other types of fraud to protect older Americans from financial exploitation and bring criminals to justice.
So it's not just reactive, it's a proactive, ongoing commitment.
[00:40:30] Speaker C: Oh, wow, that's really encouraging. It sounds like they're really dedicated to stamping out these kinds of operations.
Are they also providing advice or warnings to the public to help prevent these scams in the first place?
[00:40:44] Speaker B: They certainly are. The Department actively urges individuals to be on the lookout for specific types of scams, like fraudulent lottery, prize notification, sweepstakes, and even psychic scams. Their advice is quite clear. If you receive a phone call, letter, or email promising a large prize in exchange for a fee, do not respond.
[00:41:11] Speaker C: That's a good, practical tip. It's so easy to get caught up when something sounds legitimate, especially if they use names that sound like official departments or, you know, famous lotteries.
[00:41:24] Speaker B: Exactly.
They highlight that fraudsters often use official sounding names or even the names of real lotteries or sweepstakes. And in some cases, they'll even pretend to be government agents purportedly helping to secure a prize. It's all about creating that illusion of legitimacy and urgency that's so deceptive.
[00:41:47] Speaker C: So, beyond general warnings, does the Department of Justice have specific initiatives or resources for seniors and their families?
[00:41:56] Speaker B: Yes, they do.
They have a significant Elder justice initiative. And more information about their efforts to help American seniors is available on their dedicated webpage.
Plus, for those interested in the broader scope of their work, information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts can be found on its website.
It's part of a broader multi pronged approach to not only prosecute those who commit these crimes, but also to educate the public and prevent future Victimization, that's really important.
[00:42:35] Speaker C: It shows they're not just waiting for the crime to happen. They're trying to stop it before it even starts.
[00:42:41] Speaker B: Precisely. The scale of this problem means it requires continuous vigilance from both law enforcement and the public.
These cases, like Barbara Trickles, serve as powerful reminders of why these broader efforts are so crucial.
[00:42:56] Speaker C: You know, Nick, it's one thing to hear about the scale of these operations and the law enforcement efforts, which are obviously crucial. But what I always wonder is from a psychological perspective, why do people fall for these? I mean, how do these scales scammers manage to convince thousands, many of whom are elderly, to send money for a promised prize that just isn't real?
[00:43:24] Speaker B: That's an excellent question, Sue. And it really gets to the heart of why these scams are so insidious.
Scammers like Trickle and her co conspirators are master manipulators of human psychology.
They exploit very fundamental human desires and vulnerable abilities.
[00:43:43] Speaker C: So what are some of those key psychological tactics they use? Because when you read about it, it seems so obvious from the outside.
[00:43:52] Speaker B: It really does. From the outside, it might seem obvious, but when you're caught in their web, it's a different story.
One of the primary tactics is creating an illusion of legitimacy and authority. The mailings in this scheme for for example, were designed to look like official notices. We saw how they used titles like attention victim name, our prize search committee is trying to locate you or official Winners Search Notification.
They'd use names like Winners Search Advisory or Office of the Registrar Funding Division.
[00:44:29] Speaker C: Oh, wow. I remember reading about those. They sound like real government agencies or legitimate organizations, don't they?
[00:44:36] Speaker B: Precisely. And they didn't stop there.
The mailings often included official looking seals and stamps, making them appear even more authentic.
They even purported to be signed by individuals with official sounding titles like board Chairman or Chief of Administration, who of course didn't exist.
It's all about building that initial trust and making the victim believe this is a credible communication.
[00:45:06] Speaker C: That's so clever and manipulative. So they establish legitimacy. Then what?
[00:45:11] Speaker B: Then they introduce the element of personalization and urgency. The indictment noted that these mailings appeared to be personalized with the recipient's name appearing multiple times and often including unique identification or claim numbers.
This makes the victim feel specially selected, like they're truly unique winners.
[00:45:35] Speaker C: Oh no. Really? So it's not just a generic mass mailing. They make it feel like it's just for you. That's crazy. How do people fall for that?
[00:45:44] Speaker B: Yeah, I know. It Sounds unbelievable, but scammers are incredibly convincing. They'd include phrases like, you are required to complete and return the accompanying form. Form issued exclusively in your name. This creates a sense of obligation and an urgent need to act quickly before the prize is lost.
It triggers fear of missing out or fomo, which is a powerful psychological trigger.
[00:46:14] Speaker C: So you've got legitimacy, personalization, and urgency. What about the prize itself? How do they make that part believable?
[00:46:21] Speaker B: That's where the low cost, high, high reward fallacy comes in. They promise a massive cash prize. We're talking hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars for a relatively small fee, usually 20 to 50.
This small fee makes it seem like a minor investment for a life changing payout. It feels like a plausible processing fee or tax that you might genuinely encounter with a. A large prize.
[00:46:51] Speaker C: Wait, hold on. Are you saying they actually believed a $20 fee would get them a million dollars?
[00:46:57] Speaker B: Exactly. And once a victim responded to that initial mailing, they were often inundated with additional fraudulent mailings. Trickle and her co conspirators actually used victim response data to target them repeatedly, reinforcing the illusion and draining more money.
It's a classic conditioning technique. Once they get a response, they know that person is susceptible.
[00:47:23] Speaker C: That's a really dark feedback loop. But why are older adults disproportionately targeted in these schemes? Nick, is there a particular vulnerability that scammers exploit?
[00:47:34] Speaker B: Unfortunately, yes.
While anyone can fall victim to a scam, older adults are often targeted for several reasons.
For one, they may have accumulated savings or assets, making them attractive targets for financial exploitation.
Secondly, there can be an element of social isolation, especially for those living alone, which can make them more susceptible to engaging with seemingly friendly or even authoritative mailings. They might also be more polite or trusting of official looking communications.
Scammers prey on this trust.
Also.
While this was a mail fraud scheme, many seniors are less familiar with the rapidly evolving digital landscape, which can make them less skeptical of sophisticated looking communications. Even those received through traditional mail. They might not be as quick to spot the subtle red flags younger generations might. Might more readily recognize.
[00:48:39] Speaker C: So it's not necessarily about being less intelligent, but more about circumstances and a different upbringing. Where trust in official correspondence was more common.
[00:48:50] Speaker B: Precisely. It's about leveraging societal norms and tragically, a genuine desire for good fortune or even just human connection.
The scammers are very patient and persistent. Persistent, Constantly reinforcing the idea that a huge prize is just around the corner if the victim just pays one more small fee. And remember, the victims never received A large cash prize. They got a report describing sweepstakes opportunities or a trinket of minimal value.
It's a cruel deception that relies on hope and trust.
[00:49:30] Speaker C: It truly is. It's a stark reminder of how these criminals exploit human nature.
So for our listeners out there, what are the actionable takeaways? What are the key red flags they should look out for to avoid falling victim to these types of prize notification or sweepstakes scams?
[00:49:51] Speaker B: That's the most crucial part, Sue.
Knowing the tactics is one thing, but knowing how to defend yourself is another.
The absolute golden rule for any prize notification or sweepstakes is if you have to pay a fee to receive a prize, it's a scam that's so simple.
[00:50:11] Speaker C: But so often overlooked. So if someone says you've won a million dollars, just send us 50 bucks for processing. That's an immediate red flag.
[00:50:21] Speaker B: Exactly.
Legitimate lotteries and sweepstakes will never ask you to pay a fee, taxes, or processing costs upfront to receive your winnings. Taxes are usually withheld directly from the prize, or you pay them yourself when you file your return, they won't ask for a fee to release your prize.
[00:50:45] Speaker C: Okay, so no money exchanges for prizes. What else?
[00:50:48] Speaker B: Be incredibly skeptical of any unsolicited prize notifications. If you didn't enter a sweepstakes, a lottery, or a contest, you simply can't win.
It's that simple. These scammers cast a wide net, sending millions of mailings, hoping someone bites.
[00:51:08] Speaker C: Oh, I mean, that makes so much sense when you think about it. If I didn't buy a ticket, I can't win the lottery.
[00:51:14] Speaker B: Precisely. Another major red flag is the pressure to act immediately. Remember how these mailings used urgent language.
You are required to complete and return this form promptly, or your prize will be forfeited.
Scammers thrive on urgency because it bypasses critical thinking. They want you to make a decision without having time to research or consult with a trusted family member or friend.
[00:51:41] Speaker C: Yeah, that makes sense. Like the whole FOMO fear of missing out tactic we talked about.
[00:51:47] Speaker B: Spot on.
And let's not forget the official sounding names and fake government affiliations. As we saw with Trickle's scheme, they used names like Premium Award center or Department of Global Response.
Always, always verify the legitimacy of any organization that contacts you.
Don't use the contact information provided in the the suspicious mailing. Look up their official website or phone number independently.
A real government agency or a legitimate company won't mind you doing your due diligence.
[00:52:21] Speaker C: So if you get a letter from Say the National Prize Clearinghouse. Don't call the number on the letter. Go online and search for National Prize Clearinghouse and see if a legitimate entity even exists in the real world.
[00:52:35] Speaker B: World, absolutely. And if you find one, compare the contact information carefully. Scammers often use very similar names to real organizations to confuse people.
[00:52:45] Speaker C: What about the personalization aspect you mentioned? They made it seem like it was just for you, right?
[00:52:52] Speaker B: While personalization can be a sign of legitimate communication, in these scam cases, it's a tactic to make you feel special and chosen, as if this prize is meant specifically for you.
Be wary when these personalized messages come with the other red flags, like upfront fees or extreme urgency. And watch out for anything that promises actual transmittal papers or refers to you as a beneficiary if you haven't initiated the process yourself.
[00:53:26] Speaker C: So it's not just one thing, but a combination of factors, like a puzzle. If too many pieces don't fit, it's probably a scam.
[00:53:34] Speaker B: That's right. And speaking of pieces not fitting, be skeptical of claims that sound too good to be true. A $20 fee for a million dollar prize.
That's a classic example. If it seems unrealistic, it almost certainly is. No one gives away millions for a few dollars.
[00:53:53] Speaker C: You know, you'd think that would be obvious, but. But I guess when you're caught up in the excitement, it's easy to overlook.
[00:53:59] Speaker B: It is, Sue. It really is.
Scammers prey on hope and sometimes even desperation, so the key is to stay grounded. If you receive one of these notices, talk to someone you trust. A family member, a friend, or even your bank. Before you do anything. A second pair of eyes can often spot one. What's wrong? And never, ever give out personal information like bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, or credit card details over the phone or in response to an unsolicited mailing.
[00:54:34] Speaker C: That's a good general rule of thumb for any kind of unsolicited contact. Really?
[00:54:39] Speaker B: It absolutely is. And finally, remember what the Department of Justice urges. Be on the lookout for fraudulent lottery, prize notification, sweepstakes, and psychic scams. These are common categories. If you receive a phone call, letter, or email promising a large prize in exchange for a fee, do not respond.
Just don't.
[00:55:04] Speaker C: That's great advice, Nick. It really boils down to skepticism and vigilance. But what if someone is listening right now and they're thinking, oh, oh, no, I think I or someone I know might have fallen for something like this?
What resources are available for victims or their families? Where can they Turn for help.
[00:55:24] Speaker B: That's an incredibly important question, sue, because even with all the awareness, these scams are so sophisticated that people do fall victim. The good news is help is absolutely available and there are dedicated resources for elder fraud victims.
[00:55:43] Speaker C: Okay, tell us more because that's probably the most critical takeaway for many.
[00:55:48] Speaker B: Absolutely. The primary resource I want to highlight is the national Elder Fraud hotline. It's a fantastic initiative by the u. S. Department of justice. The number is 1-833-FRAUD-11-800-3333, Fraud 1 1.
[00:56:07] Speaker C: Got it. And what kind of support does it offer?
[00:56:09] Speaker B: This hotline, managed by the office for victims of crime, is staffed by experienced professionals. They provide personalized support, assessing the victim's needs and identifying relevant next steps. They can help identify appropriate reporting agencies, provide information on how to report, report, and connect callers directly with those agencies.
They also offer resources and referrals on a case by case basis.
[00:56:40] Speaker C: So it's not just a number to report, but actual guidance and support. That's really comprehensive.
[00:56:47] Speaker B: Exactly. It's designed to be a first step and a crucial one.
Reporting is essential because it not only helps authorities identify those committing fraud, but reporting financial losses as soon as possible can actually increase the likelihood of recovering some of those losses.
[00:57:05] Speaker C: That's good to know. And what are their operating hours?
[00:57:08] Speaker B: The hotline is open Monday through Friday from 10am to 6pm Eastern Time. And for those who might need it, support is available in English, Spanish and other languages.
[00:57:20] Speaker C: That's really helpful.
So beyond the hotline, are there other places to report or get information?
[00:57:27] Speaker B: Yes, definitely. The Department of Justice is very active in this area.
You can find more information about their efforts to protect seniors on their Elder justice initiative webpage. Additionally, elder fraud complaints can also be filed with the Federal Trade Commission or ftc.
[00:57:46] Speaker C: The ftc. Okay, how do you do that?
[00:57:48] Speaker B: You can file a complaint online@report fraud.ftc.gov or if you prefer to speak to someone, you can call them at 877-FTC-HELP.
It's another vital pathway for reporting.
[00:58:03] Speaker C: So we've got the national Elder Fraud Hotline for comprehensive support and the FTC for reporting. Any other official resources?
[00:58:12] Speaker B: The Department of Justice also provides a variety of resources specifically related to elder fraud victimization through its Office for Victims of crime, which can be
[email protected] and for general information about the Consumer protection branch and their enforcement efforts against schemes like the one Barbara Trickle was involved in, you can visit justice.gov Civil Consumer Protection Branch.
It highlights their commitment to protecting consumers from fraudulent mass Mailing schemes, so many.
[00:58:51] Speaker C: Resources, which is comforting. It shows that there's a serious commitment to combating this problem.
[00:58:57] Speaker B: There is, Sue. It's a fight on many fronts, from investigation and prosecution, as we saw with Trip Trickles case, to providing direct support and resources to victims.
The key message for our listeners is if you or someone you know is age 60 or older and has been a victim of financial fraud, do not feel ashamed and do not hesitate to reach out.
These resources are there to help and you are not alone.
[00:59:29] Speaker C: That's such an important point, Nick. The shame and embarrassment can often keep victims from coming forward, which only helps the scammers.
[00:59:38] Speaker B: You're right on point, Sue. And these professional operators at the hotlines and agencies are trained to help without judgment. They understand the sophisticated nature of these scams and how easy it can be for anyone, especially vulnerable elders, to fall prey.
Reporting is truly the first step toward recovery and more broadly, towards preventing others from becoming victims.
[01:00:05] Speaker C: This case with Barbara Trickle, Kimberly Stamps and John Kyle Mueller really underscores just how organized and persistent these fraud schemes can be. I mean, operating for six years, stealing over $15 million, and even continuing to see despite early warnings, it's a stark reminder.
[01:00:26] Speaker B: It absolutely is, Sue. The sheer scale and the duration of their operation highlight the critical need for constant vigilance. What we learned today about how these fraudulent prize notices were crafted, the official sounding names, the personalization that wasn't really personal at all. It shows the deliberate effort to create an illusion of legitimacy.
[01:00:51] Speaker C: It makes you realize that these aren't just random petty criminals. These are operations with a business model, however illicit. They analyze victim data, they refine their approach.
It's a cold, calculated process.
[01:01:07] Speaker B: Precisely.
And that's why the key takeaway for all our listeners, whether for themselves or their loved ones, and is to cultivate a healthy dose of skepticism. If something sounds too good to be true, especially if it involves sending money for a prize, it almost certainly is right.
[01:01:27] Speaker C: Always question unexpected notifications, verify claims independently, and never ever send money or personal information in response to these kinds of unsolicited offers.
[01:01:40] Speaker B: That's the golden rule, Sue. This case vividly illustrates that these scammers are expert manipulators. They target vulnerabilities, often preying on hope or a desire for financial security.
But by staying informed about their tactics and understanding the red flags, we empower ourselves and our communities to combat this.
[01:02:04] Speaker C: So the lessons are clear.
Be skeptical, be informed, and be proactive in protecting yourself and others.
This isn't just about financial loss. It's about the emotional toll these scams take on victims and their families?
[01:02:21] Speaker B: Absolutely.
It's about protecting dignity and peace of mind.
The more we talk about these cases, the more we understand the methods, the harder it becomes for these fraudsters to succeed.
It's a collective effort, really. Keep having these conversations with your family and friends. Before we close, I want to mention that if you'd like to read the full federal indictment for the case we just covered, we've posted a copy on the podcast episode
[email protected] I like to include these documents because they show in black and white exactly how these scams are pulled off, and they're a powerful way for people to learn how scammers operate. They're also helpful for victims and advocates who want to see the full scope of the fraud.
Just a heads up, platforms like Apple Podcasts and Spotify don't allow PDF attachments, so the only place to get it is directly on our website.
Head to the podcast
[email protected] to download your copy. That's all for today's episode of behind the Scams. Thanks for listening. Bye for now.
[01:03:36] Speaker C: And remember, stay safe, stay informed, stay alert, and we'll catch you next time. Now, Miles, please close out this episode of behind the Scams that wraps up.
[01:03:47] Speaker A: This episode of behind the Scams.
If you want to dig deeper, head over to stampoutscams.org where you can download the full federal indictment and access exclusive resources not available on platforms like Apple or Spotify. Learn exactly how the scam worked straight from the court documents. And while you're there, report a scam, browse prevention tips, or watch our latest scam news coverage on scamtv.
Remember, scammers count on silence and confusion.
Let's beat them with truth and awareness.
Until next time, stay sharp, stay safe, and keep scanning for the signs.
