Criminal Photoshops Himself Into Charity Photos In Bid For Leniency 108
38-year-old Daryl Simon decided it would be a good idea to submit fake pictures of himself at charity events, and forged letters of support from various charitable organizations to the court before he was sentenced for credit card fraud. Unfortunately for Daryl, he is as good at Photoshop as he is at credit card scams, and Judge Stephen Robinson was not amused. Simon was sentenced to 285-months in prison — 50 months more than the maximum under sentencing guidelines. From the article: "Daryl Simon's bald-faced move included sticking a picture of himself into a shot with a physical-therapy patient, then flipping the image and placing it next to a teen student. 'Evidence that his image was inserted and flipped can be seen by examining the single detail on his shirt above his fingers — that detail appears on the left side of the shirt in the top photograph, and on the right side of the shirt in the bottom photograph,' prosecutors wrote."
Different definition of "maximum"? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Different definition of "maximum"? (Score:5, Interesting)
What he did could be considered an act in contempt of court, which could easily be another charge to tack time to his sentence.
Re:What really gave him away was the picture... (Score:1, Interesting)
You can't be serious! Next you're going to tell me that the Save the Ewoks Foundation that Simon told me about isn't a real charity!
Maybe he'll do a better job next time (Score:5, Interesting)
Some years ago, I acted as an expert witness in a civil case that involved forged pages inserted into the only extant signed copy of a contract. I testified on the stand at length as to all the various evidences that these specific pages had been deliberately changed and had likely been retyped and then printed: they were printed on an ink-jet printer vs. a laser printer for the original pages; there were words misspelled that had been correctly spelled in the most recent electronic version of the document; there were three lines of text completely missing on one of the altered pages, likely due to similar line endings (i.e., the typist looked at the hard copy, typed the text in, then looked back and inadvertently skipped down three lines); and so on.
After I had testified, I was excused from the courtroom along with the alleged forger so that the lawyers could argue some motions before the judge. Out in the hallway, the alleged forger turned to me and said, "Your testimony was very interesting; I learned a lot." I thought, "Oh, great. Now he'll know what to avoid in the future." :-) ..bruce..