Believe It or Not

At Commercial Investigations LLC (CI), we see and hear all sorts of outrageous things. It is almost like working in a hospital everyday where there is some crazy story or exciting new adventure going on.  Many times we’re left laughing or in wonder due to something scandalous, challenging, disheartening, or simply outrageous going on.  Let’s play “Believe It or Not”, shall we?  You can see the answer, true or false, by checking the bottom of the article after reading.  Try not to peek!

1.    A subject disclosed a misdemeanor or felony conviction on their consent form, but provided no further details.  When asked by an investigator when the offense occurred, the subject replied, “It was so long ago that I can’t remember.”  The offense happened in 2016.  True or false?

2.    In the comments section of the consent form’s misdemeanor and felony conviction information, a subject simply wrote, “Figure it out.”  CI investigators figured it out by finding five misdemeanor convictions in Florida.

3.    A subject supplied a diploma from Federal State University with a “Bachelor’s” in Radiology.  The top half of the document was taken from a GED, and the bottom was taken from an entirely different template found online.  These pieces were then attached together crookedly.  Ok…that one can’t wait!  It’s totally true!  Can you imagine?  We have been uncovering a lot of fake diplomas lately, so beware if you're not verifying education.  We can help you with that <wink>.

4.    A subject simply entered “speeding tickets” on his consent form when asked if he had ever been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony.  In New York State, that wouldn’t have resulted in any passable information to the client.  However, because it was disclosed and further investigation was necessary, investigators uncovered several speeding tickets throughout four states.  One of the tickets, in Texas, was considered a misdemeanor.

5.    A subject disclosed a conviction of trespassing as a teenager.  After further research by our investigators, it ended up really being a petit larceny conviction.

6.    The New York State Office Of Court Administration (OCA) had no record of a sex offender that our investigators uncovered by running CI's proprietary database search, Cursory Indicator New York™.

7.    A subject disclosed a conviction on his consent form.  When the OCA NY Statewide search was run, it came back clear.  Investigators ran Cursory Indicator New York, which resulted in a hit.  With further research, the court confirmed a felony burglary conviction.

8.    A man disputed a misdemeanor conviction revealed on his background investigation report.  He argued that his cousin had the exact same first, middle, and last name as he did.  He also told an investigator that they were born the same year.  Really?  

So, what do you think?  Are you a gumshoe in the making?
 

Answers:
1. False (it was 2017)  2. True  3. True  4. True  5. False (it ended up being grand larceny)  6. True  7. True  8. True (they were born three months apart)