Reply #35: Good point

[fasttense]

That is what fraud is all about. You think you're doing one thing and in actuality you are doing something else. That's what people seem to forget when they ask for absolute, indisputable, point to the murderer proof. You were led to think you were doing something else like a con job.

You get swindled out of your money by a guy who says you just won $1,000,000. On the surface, the guy appears honest. So you give him money in order to collect your $1,000,000. It's a collection fee, an administrative fee. We are all use to paying those. And guess what? You never get your $1,000,000. You call him and he tells you there was a glitch, and just wait, your money is in the mail. So you wait and wait and by the time you have it figured out, he's long gone with your money.

So what can you point to to say you were conned? A check, a perfectly legal check you made out to the con artist. What proof is that? That's just stupidity. He didn't threaten you, he didn't hold a gun to your head. Prove that you were conned. Well he misrepresented himself. Well that's the name of the game isn't it? Does the diet pill really let you lose weight? Does the get rich quick scheme really work? You've just learned an expensive lesson. That's one of the reasons people who are conned out of their money are reluctant to report it. They feel stupid and what evidence do they really have to prove the guy was conning them?

In most cases of fraud the evidence is hidden, out of sight, you're never going to see it.