Applying the materials in this module, please identify and explain what investigative challenges exist when investigating a grandparent scam done with AI from a call center in Canada. There is no right or wrong answer, but compare it to the guidance for the first officer to arrive on the scene of a reported robbery on page 298 of our text to give you an idea of where to start.

Question

Applying the materials in this module, please identify and explain how police could overcome the challenges of investigating a counterfeit money case involving a high-quality and accepted fake bill like the $100 bill at Inlet Rocks Bait & Tackle (the paper is real and the printing does not show obvious signs of being fake). Remember, one element the state must prove is knowledge: The suspect knew or should have known the bill was fake. If a cashier with training in counterfeit detection thought it was good, how can you get evidence that the suspect knew the bill was fake? There is no right or wrong answer, but the two videos do offer some facts that would tend to prove the suspects knew the bills were fake. What are those facts? What other facts could the police develop through traditional investigative techniques to gather more evidence that the suspects knew the bills were fake?

Answer 1

Investigating a grandparent scam conducted using AI from a call center in Canada poses several unique challenges due to the sophisticated nature of the technology employed and the transnational aspect of the crime. These challenges can be compared to the initial investigative steps that law enforcement officers take upon arriving at a scene of a reported robbery.

Investigative Challenges for Grandparent Scam

1. Anonymity and Jurisdiction Issues: The use of AI and call centers in Canada means many perpetrators can operate under layers of anonymity. This complicates jurisdiction and the ability of law enforcement in the victim's region to coordinate with Canadian authorities. Just like a robbery where identifying the suspect is crucial, in a grandparent scam, law enforcement must first pinpoint the origin of the call and its operators.

2. Technological Sophistication: The use of AI can include advanced voice synthesis which may make it difficult for victims to identify the call as a scam, similar to how a highly skilled thief might manipulate security systems during a robbery. This necessitates a forensic examination of the technology used, which requires specific expertise that may not be readily available.

3. Victim Cooperation: Victims of grandparent scams are often embarrassed or unwilling to admit that they were scammed, which can hinder investigations. This is akin to the fear and potential disorientation a victim may experience following a robbery, making initial interviews challenging.

4. Evidence Collection: Collecting telecommunications evidence (such as call records) requires legal action, which can be hampered by international law. Much like securing evidence at a robbery scene, thorough procedure is necessary to obtain records from telecom providers, which typically involves significant time delays.

5. Psychological Manipulation: The emotional manipulation involved in these scams can lead victims to doubt their own memories or understanding of events, hence complicating witness statements and testimonies.

Overcoming Challenges

To effectively tackle these challenges, law enforcement can:

• Establish Joint Investigative Teams: Form task forces that include Canadian and local law enforcement to investigate cross-border crimes. This mirrors how officers at a robbery scene might collaborate with detectives to gather information quickly and efficiently.

• Use of Technology Experts: Recruiting forensic experts to analyze call data and AI technologies akin to how robberies might be reviewed for digital evidence such as surveillance footage.

• Awareness Campaigns: Conduct community outreach to empower potential victims to recognize scams, similar to crime prevention tips provided by law enforcement post-robbery.

Investigating Counterfeit Money Case

When dealing with a counterfeit money case involving high-quality fake bills, the main challenge is proving the suspect's knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the currency. Although a cashier with training accepted it, this doesn’t absolve the suspect if they knowingly passed a counterfeit bill.

Facts Suggesting Knowledge of Counterfeit Bills

1. Behavioral Indicators: If the suspect seemed overly nervous, watched the cashier closely, or rushed the transaction, these could indicate awareness of a counterfeit being present.

2. Prior History: If the suspect has a history of counterfeit involvement or prior convictions, this can support the idea that they should have recognized the bill was fake.

Additional Investigative Techniques

• Surveillance Footage: Gathering CCTV footage from the store and surrounding areas could provide context on the suspect’s behaviors before and after the transaction.

• Witness Statements: Interviewing other customers or employees could help establish whether the suspect exhibited suspicious behavior.

• Cash Register Records: Examining the cash register records to find other transactions involving potential counterfeit bills can establish patterns of behavior related to the suspect.

• Forensic Analysis of the Bill: Conducting detailed forensic examinations of the counterfeit bill itself could potentially lead to evidence about the source or printing method used, helping to infer knowledge or intent.

In conclusion, both investigations highlight the importance of careful analysis of evidence, cooperation across jurisdictions, and a thorough understanding of human behavior in the context of crime.