Jasper Goodman Raleigh is a Convicted Criminal. BEWARE!!

By Guest

Don’t work with Jasper Goodman Raleigh before reading this article.

The man is not what he claims to be. He is a fraudster who faced multiple legal proceedings because of his involvement in a multi-million scheme.

Jasper Goodman engaged in bank fraud, wire fraud, credit card fraud, and several other fraudulent activities and faced legal action because of them. Read this article before you consider doing business with the man.

Jasper Goodman Raleigh’s Involvement in the Identity Fraud Ring

Beware of Jasper Goodman of Raleigh. The man was involved in some of the biggest bank frauds in Raleigh. There are multiple press releases by the Justice Department on the guy’s crimes.

I’m sharing one of them below to help you understand why you should be cautious while working with him.

Jasper Goodman Raleigh
Snippet of the case involving Jasper Goodman Raleigh

According to the DOJ press release, a man from Knightdale was sentenced to 100 months in prison, along with 5 years of supervised release. Additionally, he was ordered to make restitution in the amount of $412,885.17. This sentence was given due to his involvement in bank fraud and aiding and abetting, which violated Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1344 and 2.

According to United States Attorney Michael F. Easley, Jr., it was revealed that Michael Griffin had been the mastermind behind an elaborate operation that involved the use of stolen and synthetic identities to deceive multiple banks. As part of his scheme, the defendant involved and utilized numerous family members and clients, who are now facing the consequences of their participation. This case served as a cautionary tale to the public. If someone had offered to provide an alternate social security number or credit profile number (CPN) in the past, it would have been an invitation to participate in a crime. He advised against doing it. It had the potential to result in a federal prison sentence.

According to the indictment, Michael Griffin, who operated from his business location in Raleigh and his home in Knightdale, was accused of accepting fees from clients for purported credit repair services. According to the indictment, it was claimed that Griffin had been creating fictitious credit profiles and fraudulently altering client credit data by using fictitious police reports.

According to the indictment, several defendants, including some who were family members, allegedly conspired with Griffin to deceive Synchrony Bank, the provider of Lowe’s credit cards. Their scheme involved opening credit accounts using fake identities, using prepaid cards to withdraw funds from these accounts, and subsequently failing to repay the credit balances. Various defendants were also charged in the indictment for committing similar frauds against other banks, such as Capital One and Discover.

On August 24, 2021, Griffin pleaded guilty to Count 14 of the Second Superseding Indictment. It was alleged that Griffin, along with codefendant Jasper Goodman, had defrauded Synchrony Bank by manipulating a credit account under the name of Michael Jones. It was claimed by Count 14 that the defendant and Goodman had fabricated an identity by utilizing a stolen social security number. They were accused of utilizing the fraudulent credit account from February to November of 2018.

Bank fraud is not a small crime. There can be many potential consequences for the illicit activities of Jasper. Here’s an overview of them.

In the United States, the legal punishment for bank fraud is severe, reflecting the serious nature of the crime and its potential impact on financial institutions and the economy. The primary statute governing bank fraud is 18 U.S.C. § 1344, which outlines the penalties and scope of the offense. Here are the key details regarding the legal punishment for bank fraud under this statute:

  1. Imprisonment: The statute provides for a maximum imprisonment term of up to 30 years for individuals convicted of bank fraud.
  2. Fines: Convicted individuals may also face fines of up to $1,000,000.
  3. Asset Forfeiture: In addition to fines and imprisonment, federal prosecutors often seek the forfeiture of assets obtained through or involved in the bank fraud scheme.

Scope and Application of the Statute

  • Broad Definition: The statute defines bank fraud as knowingly executing or attempting to execute a scheme or artifice to defraud a financial institution or to obtain any of the money, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.
  • Applicability: This statute applies to a wide range of fraudulent activities against financial institutions, including but not limited to check fraud, loan fraud, and internet bank fraud. It covers both actions taken against banks and fraudulent activities involving bank customers’ assets.

Sentencing Guidelines and Factors

  • Sentencing Guidelines: While there is no mandatory minimum sentence for bank fraud, the sentencing guidelines are highly influential in determining the actual sentence. These guidelines consider factors such as the defendant’s criminal history and the specifics of the fraudulent activity, including the amount of financial loss caused.
  • Judicial Discretion: Federal judges have the discretion to impose a sentence ranging from probation to the maximum 30 years, depending on the severity and particulars of the case.

Additional Considerations

  • Multiple Charges: Often, bank fraud charges are accompanied by other related charges such as money laundering, identity theft, or wire fraud, which can lead to additional penalties.
  • Legal Representation: Given the complexity of bank fraud cases and the severe potential penalties, it is crucial for those accused to seek experienced legal representation to navigate the legal system and potentially mitigate the consequences.

In summary, the legal punishment for bank fraud in the U.S. under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 includes up to 30 years in prison, fines up to $1,000,000, and possible asset forfeiture. The broad scope of the statute means it can apply to a wide array of fraudulent activities involving financial institutions. The actual sentence can vary widely based on the specifics of the case and the application of federal sentencing guidelines.

Jasper Goodman is a Part of the Problem in Raleigh, North Carolina

Recent cases of fraud in Raleigh and North Carolina have involved various schemes, including naturalization fraud, phishing scams targeting businesses, and broader issues of election fraud allegations. Here are summaries of notable cases:

1. Naturalization Fraud Case in Raleigh

  • Case Summary: An ICE investigation led to the indictment of Robert Davis, a 67-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen, for naturalization fraud. Davis was charged with making false statements on his naturalization application regarding past criminal activities. He had previously been convicted of indecent acts with a child and attempted first-degree sexual offense, as well as possessing child pornography.
  • Investigation and Outcome: The case was part of Operation False Haven, aimed at identifying and prosecuting individuals who fraudulently obtained U.S. citizenship, especially those involved in child molestation and other serious felonies. Since its inception, the initiative has led to numerous criminal cases, convictions, and revocations of citizenship.

2. Phishing Scam Targeting Raleigh Restaurant

  • Case Summary: Zanyu Asian Noodles, a Raleigh restaurant, fell victim to a phishing scam that resulted in the loss of over $20,000. The scam involved fraudsters impersonating Uber Eats and tricking the restaurant owner into changing account information, which redirected payments to the scammers.
  • Resolution: After months of unsuccessful attempts to resolve the issue with Uber Eats, the restaurant owner sought help from a local troubleshooter, Diane Wilson, who facilitated communication with Uber Eats. The restaurant eventually received the owed amount. The case highlights the importance of vigilance against phishing scams.
  • 2016 Election Fraud Allegations: Following the 2016 governor’s race in North Carolina, supporters of then-Gov. Pat McCrory filed election protest petitions accusing dozens of North Carolinians of committing voter fraud. These allegations were later dismissed as baseless by election officials.
  • Legal Proceedings: The individuals falsely accused of voter fraud pursued defamation lawsuits against the lawyers and committee behind the fraud claims. The North Carolina Supreme Court considered whether those involved in making the false accusations should be immune from defamation lawsuits. The case has implications for how future allegations of voter fraud are handled in the state.

4. Broader Context of Election Fraud Concerns

  • National Implications: The pattern of false claims of voter fraud observed in the 2016 North Carolina governor’s race echoed in the national 2020 presidential election. The legal and political battles over these allegations in North Carolina could influence strategies and legal protections related to election fraud claims in future elections.

As you can see, there are multiple cases of fraud going on in Raleigh and North Carolina. Jasper Goodman’s case is just one of the many such cases going on in the state.

Avoid Jasper Goodman in Raleigh

Be extremely careful when dealing with this man. It would be best if you avoid doing business with him altogether.

What do you think of Jasper Goodman Raleigh? Do you have any experience of working with him? Share your thoughts in the comments!

Share This Article
5 Comments
  • Interessant artikkel, det er skremmende å tenke på hvordan svindlere som Jasper Goodman kan operere så lenge uten å bli fanget.

  • Denne rapporten gir gode innsikter i alvoret i banksvindel og dens konsekvenser. Viktig lesning for alle småbedriftseiere.

  • Det plasserer virkelig ting i perspektiv når du leser om de aktuelle lovlige straffene for banksvindel. ETtersom strafferammen er så streng, håper jeg dette virker avskrekkende for andre som vurderer å begå lignende kriminelle handlinger.

  • Artikkelen fremhever et signifikant problem, ikke bare store svindlere som Jasper Goodman, men også de potensielle juridiske konsekvensene for de involverte. Det er en viktig påminnelse om å gjøre grundig bakgrunnssjekk før en inngår forretningsavtaler.

  • Interessant å se hvordan saken rundt Jasper Goodman knytter seg til bredere problemstillinger innenfor svindel og identitetstyveri. Det er viktig å holde seg oppdatert på slike saker for å beskytte seg selv og sin virksomhet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *