Information — United States v. Ford-Victory (Dkt. 2, D. Mass.)

Summary

A criminal information against Audri Ford-Victory, Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM, filed December 15, 2021 as Document 2 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Count One charges wire fraud conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 1349 over Pandemic Unemployment Assistance claims filed with the Massachusetts Department of Unemployment Assistance from about April 2020 to June 2020. It alleges the defendant submitted approximately seventy-eight PUA claims on behalf of others that resulted in the disbursement of approximately $1,107,537, including approximately twenty-five for individuals who did not appear to reside in Massachusetts. It alleges claimants made kickback payments to the defendant or an uncharged coconspirator, who made transfers totaling $1,400 via Cash App. The forfeiture allegation seeks a money judgment in an amount to be determined at sentencing.

Summary drafted by a model from the text of the original file linked on this page and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Information — United States v. Ford-Victory (Dkt. 2, D. Mass.).” Original at archive.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/information-united-states-v-ford-victory-dkt-2-d-mass-c858dcad46/, SHA-256 d633a9ec1f456239450defe8992e0baa032db0e9b0f30f099d36a3d5c023317f.

Full text

Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

) Criminal No.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) Violation:
v. )
) Count One: Wire Fraud Conspiracy
AUDRI FORD-VICTORY, ) (18 U.S.C. § 1349)
)
Defendant ) Forfeiture Allegation:
) (18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and
) 28 U.S.C. § 2461)
)

INFORMATION

At all times relevant to this Information:

General Allegations

1. Defendant AUDRI FORD-VICTORY (“FORD”) resided in Springfield,

Massachusetts.

2. Omar Thompson (“Thompson”), a coconspirator not charged as a defendant in this

Information, resided in Paterson, New Jersey.

3. Individual 1, Thompson’s father-in-law, resided outside of Massachusetts.

4. Individual 2, Thompson’s brother-in-law, resided outside of Massachusetts.

5. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) created

a new temporary federal unemployment insurance program called Pandemic Unemployment

Assistance (“PUA”).

6. The Massachusetts Department of Unemployment Assistance (“MA DUA”)

administered and managed the PUA program in Massachusetts.

7. Eligible Massachusetts residents could apply for PUA benefits from MA DUA

through an online portal by providing personally identifiable information (“PII”), including their
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 2 of 8

first and last name, Social Security number (“SSN”), date of birth, residential and mailing

addresses, and bank account information.

8. Claimants had to certify that they were working in Massachusetts, and not

working in another state besides Massachusetts, when they were impacted by COVID-19.

9. Claimants also had to certify that the information in the Massachusetts PUA

application was accurate, and that the claimant was submitting the claim on behalf of himself or

herself and not on behalf of another person.

10. The PUA claims submitted to MA DUA were processed on a server in Colorado.

11. The PUA claims information was also transmitted to DUA headquarters, located

in Boston, Massachusetts, for purposes of review by MA DUA employees, maintenance, and to

facilitate correspondence with claimants.

Overview of the Conspiracy and the Scheme to Defraud

12. From in or about April 2020 to in or about June 2020, FORD, Thompson, and

others known and unknown to the U.S. Attorney engaged in a scheme and artifice to defraud and

to obtain money and property from MA DUA by means of false and fraudulent pretenses,

representations, and promises, by submitting PUA claims to MA DUA on behalf of others, and

by submitting PUA claims for individuals not entitled to receive PUA benefits from MA DUA.

Object and Purpose of the Conspiracy and the Scheme to Defraud

13. The object of the conspiracy and scheme to defraud was to profit by submitting

PUA claims to MA DUA on behalf of others. The principal purpose of the conspiracy and

scheme to defraud was to make money.

2
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 3 of 8

Manner and Means of the Conspiracy and the Scheme to Defraud

14. Among the manner and means by which FORD, Thompson, and others known

and unknown to the U.S. Attorney carried out the conspiracy and the scheme to defraud were the

following:

a. FORD developed expertise regarding the methods for submitting PUA

claims to MA DUA.

b. FORD received the names and PII of individuals, including individuals

living and/or working outside of Massachusetts, and submitted PUA claims to MA DUA on their

behalf.

c. Thompson received the names and PII of individuals, including

individuals living and/or working outside of Massachusetts, who wanted to obtain PUA benefits

from MA DUA.

d. In some instances, Thompson provided FORD the names and other

personal information of individuals and FORD would submit the PUA claims to MA DUA on

their behalf. In other instances, Thompson submitted the PUA claims to MA DUA.

e. FORD submitted approximately seventy-eight PUA claims on behalf of

others that resulted in the disbursement of approximately $1,107,537 in PUA funds from MA

DUA.

f. Approximately twenty-five of the PUA claims that FORD submitted,

which resulted in the disbursement of approximately $215,246 in PUA funds from MA DUA,

were submitted on behalf of individuals who had both an out-of-state driver’s license and out-of-

state mailing address, and who otherwise did not appear to reside in Massachusetts.

3
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 4 of 8

g. Once the individuals on whose behalf FORD or Thompson filed a PUA

claim received payments from MA DUA, those individuals made one or more kickback

payments to FORD or Thompson.

Acts in Furtherance of the Conspiracy and Scheme to Defraud

15. From in or about April 2020 to in or about June 2020, FORD, Thompson, and

others known and unknown to the U.S. Attorney committed and caused to be committed the

following overt acts, among others, in furtherance of the conspiracy:

a. In or about April 2020, FORD offered to submit a PUA claim in

Thompson’s name to MA DUA in exchange for a fee.

b. On or about April 29, 2020, Thompson sent FORD an email with the

subject line “Unemployment” that contained Thompson’s PII.

c. On or about May 12, 2020, FORD submitted a PUA claim in Thompson’s

name to MA DUA from FORD’s home and using FORD’s IP address.

d. On or about May 19, 2020, at approximately 6:32 p.m., Thompson sent

FORD an email with the subject line, “More family”, which listed the names and PII of

Individual 1 and Individual 2.

e. On or about May 19, 2020, at approximately 7:06 p.m., FORD submitted a

PUA claim in the name and PII of Individual 1 from FORD’s home and using FORD’s IP

address.

f. On or about May 19, 2020, at approximately 7:57 p.m., FORD submitted a

PUA claim in the name and PII of Individual 2 from FORD’s home and using FORD’s IP

address.

4
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 5 of 8

g. Between on or about May 15, 2020 and on or about May 20, 2020,

Thompson made electronic transfers totaling $1,400 to FORD via Cash App.

5
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 6 of 8

COUNT ONE
Wire Fraud Conspiracy
(18 U.S.C. § 1349)

The United States Attorney alleges:

16. The U.S. Attorney re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 to 15(g)

of this Information.

17. From in or about April 2020 to in or about June 2020, in the District of

Massachusetts and elsewhere, the defendant,

AUDRI FORD-VICTORY,

conspired with Omar Thompson and others known and unknown to the U.S. Attorney to commit

wire fraud, that is, having devised and intending to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud and to

obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations

and promises, did transmit and cause to be transmitted, by means of wire communications in

interstate and foreign commerce, writings, signs, signals, pictures and sounds, for the purpose of

executing the scheme to defraud, to wit, online PUA applications in others’ names to MA DUA

without lawful authority, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349.

6
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 7 of 8

FORFEITURE ALLEGATION
(18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c))

18. Upon conviction of the offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code,

Section 1349, set forth in Count One, the defendant,

AUDRI FORD-VICTORY,

shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C),

and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any property, real or personal, which

constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offense. The property to be forfeited

includes, but is not limited to, the following asset:

a. a forfeiture money judgment, in an amount to be determined at sentencing.

19. If any of the property described in Paragraph 18, above, as being forfeitable

pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United States Code,

Section 2461(c), as a result of any act or omission of the defendant --

a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;

b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;

c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;

d. has been substantially diminished in value; or

e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without
difficulty;

it is the intention of the United States, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c),

incorporating Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p), to seek forfeiture of any other property

of the defendant up to the value of the property described in Paragraph 18 above.

All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United

States Code, Section 2461(c).
Case 3:21-cr-30049-MGM Document 2 Filed 12/15/21 Page 8 of 8

NATHANIEL R. MENDELL
ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: _______________________________
CHRISTOPHER J. MARKHAM
ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

DATE: December 2, 2021

File and source

File: 2-information.pdf
Size: 157,381 bytes
SHA-256: d633a9ec1f456239450defe8992e0baa032db0e9b0f30f099d36a3d5c023317f
Our copy: 2-information.pdf
Original: archive.org