| July 2002 | ||||||
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
| Jun Aug | ||||||
In many identity theft cases, the thief steals personal information in one city and uses the information to conduct fraud in another city or state.
All too often, the police department in the victim’s area of residence refers the victim to the police department of the area where the perpetrator used the personal information. In turn, the remote police department refers the victim back to the police department where the victim lives.
The solution is in new identity theft statutes that allow victims to file reports in any jurisdiction where the theft occurred, or where related activities arising from the theft occured. Unfortunately, the new statutes, where they exist, apply within state boundaries - not from state to state.
From a new Government Accounting Office (GAO) report on identity theft.
9:48:30 AM

