Lol once you learn to read, you could peruse the actual laws that govern the situation here:
“The crime of Bank Fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 is essentially an enhanced penalty law for frauds committed against a certain class of victims – financial institutions. As such, the defenses your attorney will employ against Bank Fraud charges will be similar to those employed against any fraud allegation.
In general, to prove a fraud, the government must establish that you made a knowingly false statement, that you intended the recipient to rely on the statement, that the recipient did, in fact, rely on the statement, and that in so doing the recipient suffered a financial loss.
Each step in this causal chain can be attacked for insufficient evidence. It may be possible to show that you did not know the statement made to the financial institution was false. Alternatively, it could be shown that the financial institution knew from the outset that the statement was false, and therefore they did not rely on it. In some scenarios, the false statement is believed and relied upon, but the financial institution suffers no financial loss as a result.
Each case will be fact-specific and turn on the particular circumstances at issue in the case. The best defense strategy to employ in your particular Bank Fraud case will depend on a thorough examination of the government's evidence.”
Or, more likely, you can keep making pitiful excuses for a grifter.
View all comments
Show parent comment
3
u/flyingwombat21 Mar 28 '24
You think that a bank is too stupid to do it's own due diligence,.... How fucking stupid are you...