"Purported Robberies Were Staged" to Support "Fraudulent Visa Applications"

A system for encouraging cooperation by crime victims was allegedly turned into a means of producing visa fraud.

From an FBI Affidavit in U.S. v. Patel:

In or around June 2023, the Boston [Violent Crimes Task Force] became aware of a series of armed robberies of commercial stores … in which all three stores were robbed at gunpoint by an individual. Based on video surveillance, witness statements, and patterns of behavior observed across the three robberies, agents believed that the robberies were connected, and that the perpetrator of each of the three robberies was likely the same person (the "Suspect").

As the FBI learned more about the robberies and learned of other robberies apparently involving the same Suspect, as well as other individuals believed to be involved in the planning and execution of the robberies, facts emerged that suggested that the SUBJECT PERSONS were involved in conduct other than purely commercial robberies. For example, toll records analysis showed that some purported victims of the supposed robberies were in contact with PATEL before the robberies. Also, investigation revealed that one of the individuals tasked with committing the robberies had traveled via airplane to commit a robbery in circumstances where the money likely to be obtained during the robbery could reasonably be expected to have been less than the cost of the travel to commit the robbery.

The FBI also learned about immigration-related activity of several store employees following their purported victimization during the robberies, as outlined below. As a result of these unusual factors, during the course of the investigation, the FBI began to suspect that the SUBJECT PERSONS and co-conspirators, both known and unknown, were engaged in a visa fraud scheme, rather than a series of Hobbs Act robberies.

As explained more fully below, there is now probable cause to believe that the purported robberies were staged for the purpose of supporting fraudulent visa applications….

I am aware that the U nonimmigration status (U visa) is available to victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and who have been helpful to law enforcement in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity. Qualifying crime victims may apply for U visa status by submitting a United States Customs and Immigration Services ("USCIS") Form I-918 petition and the Form I-918 Supplement B ("Form 918-B"). I am aware that Form 918-B must be signed by an authorized official of a certifying law enforcement agency, confirming that the individual was a victim of a qualifying crime and has been or will be helpful in the investigation or prosecution of the case.

Extortion, false imprisonment, unlawful criminal restraint, and felonious assault are among the qualifying crimes for U visa status, and at least some of the purported victims of the robberies involved in this matter have submitted Forms 918-B to local police departments, claiming that the robbery in which they were involved qualifies as one of these crimes and requesting the local police to certify that they qualify as victims….

Since early 2023, CW-1 [Cooperating Witness-1] had participated in a scheme involving PATEL, SINGH, and others known and unknown to investigators, that involved setting up and carrying out staged robberies of pre-determined commercial businesses for the purpose of rendering employees present during the purported robberies to be "victims of a violent crime" such that they would be seemingly qualified to apply for U visa status. CW-1 identified PATEL in a photograph and confirmed that he is the person charged by this complaint.

In early 2023, PATEL hired CW-1 to do construction at PATEL's home in New York, which CW-1 did. Soon thereafter, PATEL told CW-1 that he had a job that would pay $1,500. PATEL explained to CW-1 that he would be going into stores to commit robberies and that the people inside the stores would be aware that they were going to be robbed. Furthermore, PATEL advised CW-1 that some of the people who acted as victims did not work at the store and traveled from out of state to take part in the staged robbery. CW-1 explained that those people posing as victims were doing so to "get papers" to allow them to stay in the country. PATEL told CW-1 that the victims would not call the police when CW-1 committed the robberies, but CW-1 later saw on the news that victims were in fact calling police after the robberies. At least initially, CW-1 had not expected the police to be called at all.

CW-1 said that each victim paid PATEL $10,000 to take part in the staged robberies for the purpose of receiving "papers." {CW-1 later clarified that by "papers" he meant green cards or visas.} PATEL knew the store owners and the store owners allowed their respective stores to be used for the staged robberies. CW-1 understood that the store owners were fully aware of the robberies. PATEL paid each owner $1,500 to $2,000 to use the store for a robbery.

CW-1 said that during most of the robberies, CW-1 communicated with PATEL via a Bluetooth headset. During the staged robberies, PATEL would be in contact with the target store's owner or an employee who would notify PATEL when the store was empty. PATEL would in turn instruct CW-1 to go inside to "commit" the robbery….

On November 15, 2023, at approximately 12:50 p.m., CW-1 and an FBI Undercover Employee (hereinafter "UCE") conducted a consensually recorded telephone conversation with PATEL via the WhatsApp account linked to the PATEL PHONE. Prior to the call, CW-1 told PATEL that the UCE was someone he knew who might be interested in helping with the scheme. The following are excerpts in which PATEL explained what the UCE's role may be:

PATEL: Just you will go inside, I will let you know what time you need to go, like, like, give exact times, and stuff like that, so it's no one inside in the store, the store is empty, there's a guy, like two guys inside, just so, and like hands up, give me money, and just you know come back from that, nothing else.

UCE: You say I say that to a guy, are these guys like your people? Like you know these people?

PATEL: Uh, I know that peoples, but you know the customers, whenever the customer doesn't have in the store, that time you can go inside

…..

UCE: Ok, now now how does it go down? Do I got to hop the counter, do I need to pull the gun out, what do you need me to do?

PATEL: Just show the gun, that's it, just [unintelligible] hands up, just you know, just take it up from the register, the money, and just give it to me, that's it.

…..

UCE: So you sure they don't call the police, man? This shit sound a little too good to be true, man. You know what I mean, like, are you sure?

PATEL: Yeah, he can call like after fifteen minutes, don't worry.

UCE: And, and what about for, like how I look and shit, they're not going to tell how I look or nothing close to how I look, how does that work?

PATEL: No, they, they, they doesn't tell, don't worry….

During the course of the investigation, investigators have identified [eight] robberies [in six months in 2023], occurring throughout the eastern United States [from Tennessee to Massachusetts], for which there is probable cause to believe PATEL and his associates, including CW-1 and SINGH, staged the robberies in furtherance of a visa fraud scheme ….

With respect to the robberies in the chart and U visas, in seven of the eight robberies, law firms representing purported victim(s) submitted U visa Form 918-B to the relevant local police department, requesting certification…. Further, the PATEL PHONE was in contact with a telephone number that record checks indicated was associated with [one of the] attorney[s].

A good reminder that any system that provides benefits, however well-intentioned, is likely to exploited by people who aren't entitled to the benefits. I first focused on that in depth with regard to the Google deindexing system, which I wrote up in my Shenanigans (Internet Takedown Edition), but as the title suggests, there are such shenanigans in many other contexts as well. People who have studied regimes that give religious objectors exemptions from generally applicable laws or job rules have long been concerned about such fraudulent claims; Justice Brennan largely dismissed this worry in his seminal Sherbert v. Verner (1963) opinion, but I think it's a more serious concern than that opinion suggests.

Of course, this doesn't mean that the benefits programs should be rejected simply because of the risk of fraud. Insurance, for instance, provides ample opportunities and incentives for fraud—and even for murder—and yet we recognize that its benefits outweigh the risks, so that we should maintain the system while investing resources into finding and deterring the fraud. Nonetheless, whenever a system is being designed or evaluated, the risk of cheating has to be seriously considered.