Victims of Crime - The View from the Regulator
"According to Guy Gottschalk's account contained in court papers, his father began responding to the solicitations from Nigeria in 1995. A year later, Louis Gottschalk traveled to Africa to meet "The General" and other Nigerians "to show them that he was sincere so he would get the money." Another court document said he also traveled to Amsterdam to meet the Nigerians.Soon afterward, his son said Gottschalk admitted to him that he had lost $300,000 and that FBI agents concluded that he had been a victim of an Internet scam.
Several family members said that Louis Gottschalk promised to never again give money to Internet solicitors.
According to Louis Gottschalk's declaration, he had lost about $900,000 in "bad investments" by 1999. "I now realize that I was taken advantage of," he said."
What is the most amazing part of this story? That Dr. Gottschalk is finanically well off? That the good Dr. is a psychiatrist? That it was Dr. Gottshalk who first diagnosed Ronald Regan with "suffering from diminished mental ability as early as 1980"?
None of the above. The most amazing part of the story is is John Kane's, research manager of the National White Collar Crime Center, response, who said:
"people blinded by greed continue to wire their money overseas. Although this scam has been around for years," he said, "you continue to see some people who forget the adage, 'If it's too good to be true, it probably is,' and fall prey to a get-rich-quick mentality."(my emphasis)
I see, a rich doctor with strong insight in the mental processes falls "prey" to a "get-rich-quick mentality". What is more plausible, the former statement or John Kane is wrong about his assessment?
Can you imagine the uproar if someone in Kane's position said of a rape victim: women continue to wear provocative clothing, and forget the adage "no means yes"?
Why are victims of economic crimes blamed by regulators? This is the only crime in which the victims are routinely blamed for being victimized.
