Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Sue, what's your favorite football team?
[00:00:01] Speaker B: The San Francisco 49ers, of course.
[00:00:04] Speaker A: Boy, do I know you.
[00:00:05] Speaker B: Well, of course you do. We both love the San Francisco 49ers. Remember, we have matching 49er tattoos.
[00:00:13] Speaker A: We do love them, but we don't love them that much.
No matching tattoos as of yet.
But have I got a tale for you today involving the San Francisco 49ers. And strangely enough, it doesn't involve any one of their players or their personnel.
It is an absolutely crazy story.
[00:00:36] Speaker B: Wait, I think I know what you're going to tell our listeners about. And just to be clear, this is not a sports podcast. We're not behind the games. We're behind the scams.
[00:00:46] Speaker A: Exactly. But trust me, this is an absolute wild one. An amazing romance scammer tale involving our very own beloved Niners.
[00:00:55] Speaker B: I. I object already. On behalf of the faithful, I would like the record to show that The San Francisco 49ers did not authorize their logo to be used as decorative camouflage for a dating app. Confidence scheme noted.
[00:01:12] Speaker A: You sound like counsel for the defense of the team.
[00:01:15] Speaker B: I am defending the team. A man allegedly drags the Niner's name through the digital mud, and suddenly I'm expected to remain calm?
[00:01:25] Speaker A: You remained calm when I tried to throw a football at the family barbecue.
[00:01:29] Speaker B: Nick, that ball traveled six yards forward, nine yards sideways, and nearly entered a neighbor's kitchen. The only thing you completed was an insurance claim.
[00:01:39] Speaker A: In my defense, there was pressure in the pocket.
[00:01:42] Speaker B: You were standing next to a birdbath.
[00:01:44] Speaker A: A very aggressive birdbath. Today's story centers on 35 year old Dejon Labrea Love and 18 year old Taylor Jamie Chan.
Both men are accused, not convicted. And the allegations we discuss come from federal court documents and public statements by investigators.
Prosecutors allege that Love created multiple false identities. Sometimes he claimed to be a wealthy real estate investor.
Other times he claimed to be a professional football player associated with the 49ers.
Prosecutors say he used romantic relationships to steer women toward fake investments.
Chon allegedly added a second voice of authority by posing as Love's financial advisor.
[00:02:33] Speaker B: So the pitch had romance, celebrity wealth, and a financial professional standing by to say, yes, all of this is completely normal.
[00:02:42] Speaker A: A credibility stack?
[00:02:44] Speaker B: More like a credibility Jenga tower. Impressive from across the room. One fact check away from wooden blocks everywhere except.
[00:02:52] Speaker A: The complaint alleges that the truth was difficult to see.
The digital trail had been engineered to look coherent. Social posts, images, videos, account screenshots, messages and calls all reinforced one another.
[00:03:08] Speaker B: Which is why this is more than a story about an audacious fake athlete. It is a story about what happens when courtship becomes a delivery system for financial fraud and when the Internet reflects a fabricated identity back at the person trying to verify it.
[00:03:28] Speaker A: And before we go further, one line we will hold throughout this episode, the joke is on the alleged scammers and the absurd production they built.
It is not on the women who were targeted. Federal investigators say this was tailored, persistent and sophisticated.
Trust was not an accident here. Trust was the product being manufactured.
[00:03:51] Speaker B: Exactly. We can laugh at a grown man apparently treating injured reserve like a romantic resume. We do not laugh at someone whose affection, future plans and savings were deliberately weaponized against her.
[00:04:06] Speaker A: With that clear, let's go back to February 2020, when investigators say the Playbook began moving across the West Coast. According to federal court documents, beginning around February 2022, Love met many of the women online through dating apps. The known geography stretched through California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho. Different cities, different lives, but a remarkably consistent opening.
A polished stranger arrives with status, money
[00:04:39] Speaker C: and serious intentions and no modest middle ground.
[00:04:43] Speaker B: He was not saying I have a stable job and a sensible retirement account.
He was allegedly saying, in effect, I am professional football wealthy or international real
[00:04:55] Speaker A: estate Wealthy fraudsters understand narrative shortcuts.
A pro athlete does not have to explain the nice clean clothes, the travel, the irregular schedule or the apparent access.
A wealthy investor does not have to explain why every conversation eventually bends toward
[00:05:15] Speaker B: money and injured or reserved status is the perfect fog machine. You get the prestige of the roster without the inconvenience of appearing in Sunday's box score.
[00:05:26] Speaker A: For the record, my own couch potato status is technically reserve status.
[00:05:31] Speaker B: No reserve players train.
[00:05:32] Speaker A: I train. I can reach the remote without looking.
[00:05:35] Speaker B: That is not athletic development. That is habitat adaptation.
[00:05:39] Speaker A: The complaint identifies Facebook, Dating, Bumble and Tinder as platforms where Love allegedly met women.
Each one supplied the first layer of trust, a profile that appeared to have entered through the same ordinary process. And as everyone else's, the app was
[00:05:59] Speaker B: not endorsing the person, but psychologically, it could feel as if someone had already checked the guest list.
[00:06:05] Speaker A: The alleged method was not one copy and paste pitch. The FBI later described it as bespoke, meaning tailored to the individual.
The central story shifted from woman to woman.
Professional athlete, former athlete, injured player, wealthy investor, or some combination that explained both his lifestyle and his availability.
[00:06:30] Speaker B: A custom tailored con, same lining, different jacket.
[00:06:34] Speaker A: Investigators said the known women were generally under 35.
That matters because it challenges the stereotype that romance fraud only reaches older adults. The delivery system changes with the audience. Three Dating apps that is not casting a wide net, that is running a regional scouting combine.
[00:06:54] Speaker B: Except the only position he was allegedly qualified for was offensive fabrication.
[00:06:59] Speaker C: Strong wordplay, unlike your football spiral.
[00:07:02] Speaker A: Prosecutors say Love portrayed a lavish lifestyle in person and on social media. He wore 49ers gear, posted football related material and used multiple names. The criminal complaint alleges he sometimes presented himself as as a current player, a former player, or a player sidelined by injury or reserve status.
Other times the character was a wealthy real estate investor, including a Swiss connection,
[00:07:30] Speaker B: a Swiss real estate investor and a 49ers player. That is not a biography. That is what happens when a resume loses adult supervision.
[00:07:41] Speaker A: But a confidence scheme does not need every detail to survive universal scrutiny.
It needs the right detail to satisfy the target in the moment.
One woman may be reassured by the sports Persona, another by the investment Persona, another by the apparent long term relationship and talk of building a future together.
[00:08:04] Speaker B: That together matters. This was not simply give me money because I'm rich. It was let's build our life, lets grow our future. I already know how this world works and I'm bringing you into it. The money request was framed as intimacy.
[00:08:23] Speaker A: The aliases added another layer.
Public reporting on the complaint identifies names including John Love, Avril Lido Love and Jordan Love.
That last one is especially brazen because Jordan Love is an actual NFL quarterback, just not a San Francisco 49er.
[00:08:44] Speaker B: So even the fake name had borrowed sports equity. Somewhere a trademark lawyer just sat bolt upright.
[00:08:51] Speaker A: Investigators also Described a custom 49ers helmet, training images in team gear, root running drills on a beach, footage around Levi's stadium, and videos implying friendships with well known NFL receivers.
The point was not merely to say I play football.
It was to build a visual archive that made the claim feel old, lived in and socially connected.
[00:09:17] Speaker B: Props, locations, famous names, workouts. The digital equivalent of arriving at dinner in costume and hoping no one checks the cast list.
[00:09:26] Speaker A: A custom helmet is commitment to the bit it is.
[00:09:30] Speaker B: Most people buy team merchandise to support a franchise.
Allegedly, he bought it to support a
[00:09:35] Speaker C: franchise of one with terrible management and
[00:09:38] Speaker B: apparently no salary cap.
[00:09:39] Speaker A: Then came the verification problem. We tell people to search a name, inspect social media and look for inconsistencies.
That remains good advice. But this case is a warning about search contamination.
Investigators reported that Love's false social presence was extensive enough that that search engines and AI generated answers, sometimes repeated the fiction that he was a legitimate 49ers player.
[00:10:09] Speaker B: In other words, the victim asks the Internet is this man real?
And the Internet consults material. The man may have helped manufacture exactly.
[00:10:20] Speaker A: Search systems often synthesize signals they do not personally interview the equipment manager.
If enough pages, captions, followers, likes, clips and repeated claims point in one direction, an automated answer can sound confident while being wrong.
[00:10:38] Speaker B: Artificial intelligence all the confidence of a man explaining football statistics at a barbecue with none of the potato salad.
[00:10:48] Speaker A: You were looking directly at me when you said that.
[00:10:51] Speaker B: I believe in precise sourcing.
[00:10:53] Speaker A: The alleged manipulation went beyond a flattering profile.
Reporting on the affidavit says investigators found purchased social media engagement and recycled football footage stripped of identifying context.
Put those pieces beside images and team gear and a curated luxury lifestyle, and the target sees corroboration from several directions.
[00:11:18] Speaker B: Except. Except they are not independent directions. They are mirrors arranged around the same lie.
[00:11:24] Speaker A: That is the investigative takeaway. Ten search results are not ten sources if they all trace back to one social account. A screenshot is not a bank record, a logo is not employment. An AI summary is not a roster.
[00:11:39] Speaker B: And a man holding a football is not necessarily a football player. We have photographic evidence of that from your barbecue.
[00:11:47] Speaker A: The prosecution rests Happily. One detail shows how a flood of content can overwhelm chronology.
An Instagram story reportedly celebrated the 49ers trip to Super Bowl 58 nearly two years after the game was played. A careful timeline check might expose the mismatch, but most people do not audit a new romantic interest highlight reel like
[00:12:10] Speaker C: a federal affidavit, especially when the rest
[00:12:13] Speaker B: of the profile appears busy, polished and popular.
[00:12:16] Speaker A: Purchased engagement can make a page look socially vouched for. Reposted clips can imply access.
Training footage can imply employment. A stadium visit can imply belonging. None of those details proves roster status. Together, however, they can create what investigators call a false corroboration environment.
[00:12:39] Speaker B: The lie was not one photograph. The lie was an ecosystem.
[00:12:43] Speaker A: Once Love had established the relationship and the image of wealth, prosecutors say, the conversation moved toward investment opportunities promising major returns. But a promise from a romantic partner can still feel like a promise.
To make it feel like a financial system, the alleged scheme needed another character.
[00:13:07] Speaker B: Enter the advisor.
[00:13:08] Speaker A: Enter Taylor Chan, 18 years old and allegedly ready to play the part of the man managing tens of millions.
[00:13:15] Speaker B: At 18, I was managing whether I had enough gas money to get home.
[00:13:18] Speaker A: I was diversifying my portfolio between pizza and concert tickets.
[00:13:22] Speaker B: Poorly diversified, highly liquid.
[00:13:24] Speaker A: Prosecutors allege Chon falsely presented himself as Love's financial advisor, the person who had supposedly helped Love build a fortune worth tens of millions of dollars.
That role gave the scheme what investigators call third party corroboration.
Love could make the extraordinary claim and his partner in crime could appear to validate it.
[00:13:50] Speaker B: The oldest trick in the book. Updated for FaceTime. Don't take my word for it. Take the word of this completely independent person who is already waiting in the group call.
[00:14:01] Speaker A: Chan allegedly sent messages that looked like professional investment guidance. Love could then screenshot those exchanges and show them to women as proof that opportunities were real or and time sensitive.
[00:14:15] Speaker B: A screenshot of two people agreeing with each other.
[00:14:18] Speaker A: Right. It creates the appearance of an institution without the burden of having one. No registered firm.
No independently verified custodian.
No statements delivered directly from a regulated account.
Just a conversation dressed for work. The advisor character also solved a practical problem.
If Love alone described his alleged fortune, it could sound boastful. If another person described it, the claim sounded documented.
Prosecutors say Chon was presented as the advisor who had grown Love's wealth into the tens of millions within only a
[00:14:58] Speaker C: few years, which is an astonishing resume
[00:15:01] Speaker B: for someone whose age still ended in teen.
[00:15:04] Speaker A: The communications allegedly worked in two directions.
Chon could message Love about a supposed opportunity. Love could then forward the screenshot to a woman as if she were seeing private professional correspondence.
Later, both men could appear on a call and repeat the same claims.
[00:15:22] Speaker B: First the leaked memo, then the executive briefing.
[00:15:25] Speaker A: Except the memo, the executive and the investment were all alleged to be part of the same performance.
Somewhere in that call, I hope somebody asks to see the Advisor's credentials.
[00:15:36] Speaker B: At 18, his professional certification may have been knows where the screen share button is.
[00:15:42] Speaker A: That already puts him ahead of half the corporate world.
[00:15:44] Speaker B: True, but can unmute is not a fiduciary designation.
[00:15:48] Speaker A: I have been building my resume incorrectly.
[00:15:50] Speaker B: You keep the WI fi password taped under the desk drawer. Let's not discuss your resume.
[00:15:56] Speaker A: The complaint says phone applications were used to create fictitious bank and investment accounts and balances.
On a small screen, a polished dashboard can feel official.
An account name, a balance. A graph heading sharply upward. Perhaps a gain that appears too precise
[00:16:15] Speaker C: to be invented because fraud puts on
[00:16:17] Speaker B: a necktie the moment you add commas
[00:16:19] Speaker C: and two decimal places exactly you made
[00:16:22] Speaker A: money is a claim.
Your position is now worth $184,732.52.
Feels like accounting, but visual precision is not evidence.
A number displayed on someone else's phone proves only that someone else's phone has numbers.
[00:16:42] Speaker B: My weather app says it feels like 107. I have yet to withdraw 107 degrees
[00:16:48] Speaker A: from an ATM, especially not in Arizona.
[00:16:50] Speaker B: Here, the sun is the only investment guaranteed to roast your assets.
[00:16:55] Speaker A: A real return is connected to an identifiable asset and a transaction history.
You should be able to answer what was purchased? At what price? In what quantity? What fees were charged? Who executed the trade? A fake dashboard can skip all of that and jump straight to the exciting number.
[00:17:17] Speaker B: It is a scoreboard with no game underneath it.
[00:17:19] Speaker A: That's right, and smooth, spectacular gains are not reassuring.
They are a warning, FINRA cautions, that guarantees lofty returns. Unregistered sellers, complex explanations and results that rise with suspicious consistency are classic investment fraud red flags.
[00:17:43] Speaker B: Real markets have bad days. Fake markets apparently wake up every morning moisturized, optimistic and up 12%.
[00:17:53] Speaker A: Volatility is normal. Perfection is marketing. The money path was deliberately simple.
Women were directed to send funds to Love or Chon because they believed the money would be placed into legitimate investment vehicles on their behalf.
The alleged proof of performance stayed under the defendant's control balances on phone apps, screenshots messages and FaceTime displays.
The women did not receive account statements independently from a brokerage or bank.
[00:18:26] Speaker B: That is the crucial divide in a real investment account. You have a direct relationship with the custodian. You do not need your boyfriend to hold up his phone like a waiter presenting the dessert tray.
[00:18:41] Speaker A: Tonight's special is an unverified balance with
[00:18:43] Speaker C: a side of urgency and, for dessert, leveraged regrets.
[00:18:47] Speaker A: The supposed returns were massive, which helped explain Love's apparent wealth and created fear of missing out if the account seemed to rise quickly. Waiting felt expensive.
[00:18:59] Speaker B: Urgency is what scammers serve when the due diligence is undercooked.
[00:19:04] Speaker A: Here is the technical point listeners should remember.
An investment raises three separate what is the asset?
Who legally owns the account, and which regulated firm actually holds the cash or securities?
[00:19:20] Speaker B: Not which man has the most persuasive screenshot?
[00:19:23] Speaker A: Correct. With a legitimate brokerage account, the investor can identify the firm and find its official website independently.
The investor can log in directly, confirm that the account is in the proper name, and receive statements from the institution safeguarding the assets.
Those statements identify the owner, the account type, contact information, and the clearing firm holding the securities in cash.
[00:19:51] Speaker B: If every road to your money runs through the boyfriend, that is not diversification. That is a hostage situation with better fonts.
[00:20:00] Speaker A: And if the supposed advisor controls the story, the login, the balance and the withdrawal, there is no independent checkpoint. The same person is claiming the money exists and stopping you from confirming it. The public record establishes the central structure.
Women sent money to Love or Chan and Financial records traced roughly 1.3 million into accounts they controlled.
Those transfers were made for what the women believed were legitimate investments.
The alleged proof of those investments stayed under the defendant's control, phone displays, screenshots, messages, and FaceTime presentations.
[00:20:42] Speaker B: That distinction is the trapdoor. Once the funds land in an account controlled by the person making the promise, the victim depends on that person for confirmation, valuation, withdrawal and repayment.
[00:20:58] Speaker A: The supposed advisor controls every point of verification.
[00:21:01] Speaker B: He is the advisor, cashier, scorekeeper, and man holding the exit key.
That is not wealth management.
That is financial theater with no fire exits.
[00:21:13] Speaker A: The complaint describes two financial labels that could blur together in conversation. In one version, the payment was an investment.
Send it to us and we will place it into this exceptional opportunity for you.
In another, it was a personal loan to love.
Help me bridge this moment and I will pay you back quickly.
[00:21:35] Speaker B: Different rapper, same destination.
[00:21:37] Speaker A: And each rapper attacked a different hesitation.
If a woman was cautious about investing, the request could be framed as helping the man she loved.
If she was uncomfortable making a loan, it could be reframed as joining a profitable deal for their shared future.
[00:21:58] Speaker B: The label moves because the objective does not get the money out of her control and into theirs.
[00:22:05] Speaker A: It is the financial equivalent of agreeing to dinner and discovering the restaurant is actually a loan office.
[00:22:11] Speaker B: The menu has compound interest. The waiter wants your Social Security number, and somehow you are still expected to pick up the check.
[00:22:19] Speaker C: No complimentary bread, just complimentary pressure and
[00:22:23] Speaker B: a 12 month repayment schedule.
[00:22:24] Speaker A: One star, terrible ambiance, worst portfolio. Then came the stage three way FaceTime calls. Investigators say Love and Chon appeared together, displayed falsified gains and encouraged women to send money. Think about the pressure built into that setting. The romantic partner is present. The supposed expert is present. The account appears to be growing. One person supplies affection, the other supplies authority.
[00:22:53] Speaker B: Corporate video calls are irritating enough when the spreadsheet is real.
Here the alleged agenda was introductions, imaginary millions, transfer instructions, and absolutely no time for questions.
[00:23:09] Speaker A: Can everyone see my screen?
[00:23:10] Speaker B: Yes, but apparently no one can see a regulated brokerage.
[00:23:14] Speaker A: You're on mute and your retirement is fictional.
[00:23:16] Speaker B: Let's circle back after you wire another 40,000.
[00:23:20] Speaker A: Humor aside, the call creates urgency and social proof. A victim is not quietly evaluating a document. She is responding live to two coordinated people who know the script, know her hopes, and know how much resistance remains. Now look at the pressure sequence. First came aspiration, massive returns and a future built together. Then authority, Chan's supposed expertise and the appearance that he had already multiplied Love's fortune. Then visual proof, fabricated balances and gains.
Then immediacy.
A new opportunity was available now. And hesitation could mean missing it. It.
[00:24:02] Speaker B: Affection, expert endorsement, a glowing screen and a ticking clock. Four pressure Points before the victim has time to call anyone outside the bubble.
[00:24:12] Speaker A: The three way call also made refusal socially harder. A woman was not just declining an abstract product. She was disappointing her romantic partner in front of the trusted professional he had introduced. That can turn a financial decision into a test of loyalty.
[00:24:29] Speaker B: And a legitimate advisor welcomes questions. A pressure artist treats questions as betrayal.
[00:24:35] Speaker A: These pressure tactics have names.
Phantom riches means dangling spectacular wealth.
Source credibility means borrowing authority from a prestigious title, famous employer or supposed expert.
Social consensus means suggesting that other successful people are already participating.
And scarcity means claiming the opportunity will disappear unless you act now.
Financial regulators identify all four as common fraud tactics.
[00:25:09] Speaker B: So the pitch says rich people are doing it, an expert approves it, the profit is enormous and the clock is ticking.
[00:25:16] Speaker A: Four claims and none of them answers. The only useful where is the independently verified account?
[00:25:23] Speaker B: The clock is always loud when the paper will work is missing. And the investment pitch was not separate from the relationship. It was evidence of the relationship. If you trust me, we do this together. If you believe in our future, you will not hesitate. If you love me, why are you questioning my advisor?
[00:25:43] Speaker A: That is coercion. Wearing the clothes of commitment.
Court records say some women sent money for supposed investments, while some made loans to love.
When a woman did not have money available, investigators say she could be encouraged to take out a personal loan with
[00:26:03] Speaker B: repayment promised, which is an escalation every listener should hear. Clearly, the scammer has moved beyond taking available cash. He is trying to turn the victim's creditworthiness into inventory.
[00:26:17] Speaker A: And when women ran out of money or ask too many questions, prosecutors say love cut off communication.
No returns, no repayments, no legitimate account records.
The relationship disappeared with the money.
[00:26:34] Speaker B: A financial advisor who cannot produce independent custodial paperwork is not an advisor. He is a man on a call with a background.
[00:26:43] Speaker A: When savings were not available, prosecutors say the pressure sometimes shifted toward personal borrowing. The promised plan sounded Take out a loan, place the money into the opportunity, collect the gain, repay the lender, and keep the difference.
[00:27:00] Speaker B: A neat little circle on paper.
[00:27:02] Speaker A: In reality, the debt was immediate and enforceable. The investment and repayment promises were allegedly fictitious.
That left the victim with monthly payments, interest and possible damage to her credit. While the person who encouraged the loan controlled the transferred funds.
[00:27:24] Speaker B: Even the language helped conceal the risk. The victim was not told, take on debt for me. She was told, take this step for us.
[00:27:33] Speaker A: And once that debt existed, walking away could feel like locking in the loss.
The money already committed made the next payment feel like rescue instead of additional risk.
[00:27:43] Speaker B: I cannot Stop now. I have too much in it.
[00:27:46] Speaker A: Exactly. The scammer does not need the victim to believe forever. He needs her to believe for one
[00:27:50] Speaker B: more transfer and debt adds a second clock. The alleged opportunity feels urgent, but so does the real bill coming due.
[00:27:59] Speaker A: That is how a fictitious asset creates real interest charges, damaged credit, and months or years of financial recovery. Financial records cited in Reporting showed approximately 1.3 million flowing to Love and Chan.
None of the women interviewed by the FBI said she received investment proceeds, repayment or actual account information.
The alleged scheme displayed wealth but did not deliver access to it.
[00:28:27] Speaker B: And when suspicion grew, the questions became more direct.
Where is the money? Where are the statements? How do I withdraw?
[00:28:34] Speaker A: Prosecutors say Love's response was often to cut off communication.
[00:28:38] Speaker B: The Romance Advisor dashboards and future plans
[00:28:42] Speaker C: could all vanish at once after a transfer.
[00:28:45] Speaker A: The alleged fake displays could do two jobs.
First, they reassured the woman that her money had not disappeared.
Then they supplied the argument for another payment.
Look how well your investment is already doing.
[00:29:02] Speaker B: A fabricated gain is not merely a receipt. It is an upsell.
[00:29:06] Speaker A: Spot on, Sue. The victim may believe she is reviewing performance when she is actually being shown a prop designed to lower resistance. A rapidly rising balance can encourage her to add more, move faster, or borrow because the apparent profit makes the risk seem smaller.
[00:29:26] Speaker B: Until she asked for independent statements, repayment or access to the money, according to
[00:29:31] Speaker A: the public allegations, none of the women interviewed reported receiving proceeds, repayment or genuine account information.
When suspicion grew, questions became persistent or available money ran out. Love allegedly blocked them. The pressure cycle ended not with an accounting, but with an but with silence. This is also why early apparent profits are so powerful.
The number on the screen changes the victim's internal question from Is this legitimate? To how much more should I put in?
In some relationship investment scams, a small early withdrawal may even be allowed to create confidence. But the apparent success is bait for a larger deposit.
Investor.gov warns that victims may see supposed returns on convincing apps or websites and may sometimes withdraw money at first before later losing access.
[00:30:30] Speaker B: A tiny exit door open just long enough to persuade you the building is safe.
[00:30:35] Speaker A: Right? The first amount is customer acquisition. The larger amount is the objective.
[00:30:39] Speaker B: Fraudsters call it proof. Accountants call it a number. Investigators call it part of the inducement.
[00:30:46] Speaker A: From an investigative standpoint, the alleged architecture is efficient.
Love is the face and emotional center. Chon is the validating expert. The app is the false ledger.
The staged call is the performance.
The dating relationship explains trust.
The investment explains the transfer.
The fake dashboard explains explains why the victim should send more romance in the
[00:31:15] Speaker B: front office, fiction in accounting, and every
[00:31:17] Speaker A: department reports to the same two people
[00:31:20] Speaker B: the smallest multinational corporation in history until
[00:31:23] Speaker A: the questions become too concrete.
Where is the account held?
What is the advisor's registration?
Can I log in through the institution's official website?
Can I speak to the firm using a phone number I found independently?
Can I withdraw a small amount without paying a new fee?
[00:31:43] Speaker B: Real finance can be complicated. Verification should not require wardrobe, props and a supporting cast.
[00:31:52] Speaker A: The FBI opened its investigation in September 2024. According to the agency's later public update, prosecutors described Love as living a nomadic existence, moving through multiple states without a known legitimate source of employment.
In the weeks before the arrest, authorities said he traveled through Nevada, California, Oregon, New Mexico, Utah and Idaho.
[00:32:19] Speaker B: That is a lot of mileage for a man whose job title kept changing.
[00:32:22] Speaker A: Mobility can serve a fraudster. It complicates address histories, keeps relationships compartmentalized, and offers a ready expense explanation for why he cannot stay long.
Travel itself becomes part of the image, wealth, opportunity, motion.
[00:32:40] Speaker B: Or in plain English, never being around long enough for someone to ask the follow up question in person.
[00:32:46] Speaker A: The travel timeline suggests the alleged operation was still active, not merely unraveling.
Between mid July and the arrests, Love reportedly moved through through at least six states.
Authorities said he was in Idaho to meet additional prospective victims when Chan flew in from California.
[00:33:07] Speaker B: So this was not a quiet retreat with the curtains drawn. The government's theory is that the production was still booking new audiences.
[00:33:16] Speaker A: That pace also helps explain why the FBI is asking the public to come forward. A dating profile can reach across jurisdictions and instantly. While the resulting transfers, accounts, devices and witnesses may be scattered across several states,
[00:33:34] Speaker B: the offender experiences one continuous scheme. Each victim may see only her own relationship.
[00:33:41] Speaker A: Six states in a matter of weeks.
That is more travel than some legitimate regional managers.
[00:33:47] Speaker B: Legitimate regional managers have expense reports and supervisors and job titles that survive a Google search.
[00:33:53] Speaker A: On August 24, 2026, federal agents arrested Love and Chan at the airport in Boise, Idaho. Authorities said Chan had traveled from California to meet Love. They also said Love had gone to Idaho to meet additional potential victims. Prosecutors alleged that the scheme continued until the day of the arrests.
[00:34:16] Speaker B: Airport courts are built around identity checks. There is a certain grim symmetry in an alleged identity fraud, ending at 1.
[00:34:24] Speaker A: The federal complaint charged both men with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and wire fraud. At that stage, Investigators had identified 26 women and more than 1.3 million in alleged losses.
[00:34:39] Speaker B: 26 separate lives, not one headline number seven savings, loans, plans and trust, each with a person attached.
[00:34:46] Speaker A: After the arrests, the apparent scale changed quickly. In September 2026, the FBI said 35 additional women had come forward.
Investigators were still verifying those reports.
If confirmed, the case would involve 61 potential victims. FBI Portland Special Agent in Charge of Douglas Olson said the number was striking for a case involving only two subjects, and he warned that the methods could be repeated elsewhere.
[00:35:16] Speaker B: The newer reports were still under review, so 61 was not yet a settled total.
[00:35:22] Speaker A: The original figure of more than $1.3 million was tied to the 26 women identified in the complaint.
As investigators verify new reports, both the victim count and the loss amount may change.
[00:35:39] Speaker B: And coming forward takes nerve because the Internet can be merciless toward victims, especially when an alleged scam sounds bizarre in retrospect. Let me say this how could anyone fall for that Is not analysis. It is a comfort ritual. It lets the speaker imagine there is a clean dividing line between people who get deceived and people who do not.
[00:36:05] Speaker A: Investigators describe the alleged fraud as bespoke to each woman fake Personas, fabricated accounts, staged video calls, and AI reinforced identities all adapted to the individual target.
[00:36:22] Speaker B: The women did not encounter the entire absurdity in one 5 minute montage. They encountered pieces over time inside what they believed were genuine relationships. They were courted, studied, reassured and pressured.
[00:36:38] Speaker A: Fraud succeeds in sequence. The first request is rarely the catastrophic one. The offender earns a small yes, then another.
Each step makes the next feel less extraordinary, while acknowledging doubt becomes emotionally and financially harder.
[00:36:56] Speaker B: Shame protects offenders. Reporting exposes patterns. If you were targeted, the embarrassment does not belong to you.
[00:37:03] Speaker A: The public details offer a clear warning. Romance Investment fraud is no longer limited to stolen photographs and clumsy emails. It can include live video, coordinated accomplices, tailored research, plausible dashboards, and an online footprint designed to survive a casual search.
[00:37:23] Speaker B: A scam does not have to be flawless. It only has to answer each doubt long enough to reach the next transfer.
[00:37:31] Speaker A: Which brings us to Investigators Corner how the emotional and financial machinery fits together and where a potential victim can interrupt it. A relationship investment scam, often called pig butchering, usually begins with cultivation. The phrase is ugly and appropriately so. It describes building trust, then pressing for larger and larger investments before taking the money. The pattern often unfolds in six stages.
[00:38:00] Speaker B: First, contact through a dating app, social platform, or unsolicited message.
[00:38:05] Speaker A: Second, accelerated intimacy, constant messages, future plans, and the feeling that this person understands you unusually well.
[00:38:15] Speaker B: Third, borrowed credibility, an impressive job, visible wealth, a famous employer or an advisor who appears to confirm the story.
[00:38:25] Speaker A: Fourth, a low risk financial introduction, sometimes supported by a small apparent gain.
That gain is not generosity it is marketing.
[00:38:36] Speaker B: Fifth, escalation into larger transfers, loans, retirement funds or pressure to act before the opportunity closes.
[00:38:44] Speaker A: And sixth, lockout. Withdrawals fail, new fees appear, questions trigger anger, guilt or silence.
[00:38:51] Speaker B: Here are the red flags we want listeners to keep without turning every online relationship into a background investigation worthy of a stage spy movie.
[00:39:03] Speaker A: First, sudden prestige, a new match claims unusual wealth, celebrity connections, professional sports status or a high return investment record.
Do not confuse an extraordinary claim with proof.
[00:39:20] Speaker B: Second, verification that loops back to the person, their social page, their screenshots, their advisor, their app, their link, their phone number. Independent verification means you choose the source.
[00:39:34] Speaker A: Third, the relationship pivots toward money, love and investment should not arrive as a bundle deal.
[00:39:42] Speaker B: Fourth, a third party advisor enters quickly, communicates through personal channels or cannot be independently found in professional registration records.
[00:39:52] Speaker A: Fifth, you are asked to send money directly to the romantic partner, the advisor or an account they control, rather than to a regulated institution through an account in your own name.
[00:40:06] Speaker B: Sixth, the returns are unusually smooth, fast or guaranteed. Markets fluctuate. Fraud dashboards prefer good lighting.
[00:40:14] Speaker A: Seventh, pressure to borrow.
Anyone encouraging you to take out a personal loan for an investment tied to your romance and deserves an immediate pause and an independent second opinion.
[00:40:27] Speaker B: Eighth, in many investment scams, a withdrawal attempt produces a demand for another fee. Legitimate gains should not require an endless ladder of surprise payments to an individual.
[00:40:41] Speaker A: If a dating profile arrives with a financial advisor already attached, that is not a meet cute that is onboard.
[00:40:48] Speaker B: And if the third date includes an investment presentation, skip dessert and call your bank.
[00:40:54] Speaker A: Finally, a diet plan.
[00:40:55] Speaker C: I understand you understood the word dessert.
[00:40:58] Speaker A: Start by slowing the pace. Preserve messages and transaction records. Search the person's images, but do not stop there.
Check a financial professional's registration through official regulators.
Contact the team, firm or bank using information you find independently.
Then ask someone you trust, someone outside the relationship, to review the pitch.
[00:41:24] Speaker B: Never share remote access to your device, verification codes, account credentials or identity documents because someone says they are needed to complete an investment.
[00:41:35] Speaker A: If money has already moved, stop sending more.
Call your financial institution and and ask for the fraud department.
Preserve the evidence before blocking accounts. Report the suspicious profile to the platform.
Then file a report with the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center. The website is the letters I c3.gov Speed matters when institutions attempt to trace or recall funds.
[00:42:05] Speaker B: Most important, do not let shame delay the report.
You may hold the detail that connects another victim, another account or another identity.
[00:42:16] Speaker A: Fair enough, but the ambition is real.
We want SOS Media Network to become a global scam prevention network.
One where stories become intelligence. Intelligence becomes prevention and survivors.
[00:42:30] Speaker C: Help protect others and you are part of that network.
[00:42:33] Speaker B: Share a warning Check on someone who may be isolated. Report a suspicious approach.
Small actions can stop real losses.
[00:42:41] Speaker A: One conversation can stop one transfer.
One report can reveal a pattern.
One person speaking without shame can help another understand that they are not alone.
[00:42:52] Speaker B: If you believe in this mission, please consider donating to SOS Media Network your support fund's investigations, practical prevention resources, and warnings that reach people before the money moves.
[00:43:06] Speaker A: No fake dashboards, no guaranteed returns, just real support for work designed to stop scams.
[00:43:13] Speaker B: You can also help by subscribing to behind the Scams and sharing this episode with someone navigating online dating or online investing.
[00:43:22] Speaker A: And remember, if a professional athlete slides into your messages with a guaranteed investment,
[00:43:29] Speaker B: keep your heart open, your verification independent, and your wallet closed.
[00:43:33] Speaker A: I'm Nick.
[00:43:34] Speaker B: And I'm Sue.
[00:43:35] Speaker A: This is behind the Scams from the SOS Media Network.
[00:43:38] Speaker C: Expose the method, interrupt the scam, protect
[00:43:41] Speaker B: one another, and bye for now.
