http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/10/28/lottery.creditcard.ap/index.html
What surprises me most is that she was able to buy a lotto ticket with a credit card. Obviously it could vary from state to state, but I always thought lotto was a cash-only transaction.
I just can’t imagine how it must feel to have that much money so close within reach, just to lose it to your own stupidity. Although if she’s a meth addict, it might not have done her much good to have that much money anyway…
Well her mother-in-law died over a year ago… so if she’s been making payments on the card I don’t really see how it’s that bad of an offense, and I say let her keep the money.
It’s Karma’s army.
The lottery can get out of paying her, because the card wasn’t her’s. I wonder what they should do? How about they pay the companys she defrauded. They’re not going to part with money they can get out of paying. Do the police in that state seize all property connected with illegal drugs. They would demand the million from the lottery if they did pay out.
I’m with Eleusis. If she’s been making the payments, then let her keep the money. If she hasn’t, and she’s been defrauding people, then I’d say she should forfeit the money AND go to jail.
Um, she’s been defrauding people with every use of the card that she does not have authorization to use. She is misrepresenting herself to be either her dead aunt or an authorized user of her dead aunt’s card with every purchase. Considering how rampant identity theft is, I’m surprised at the “not a big deal” reaction people are having.
I guess some people might see it as a “victimless” crime, as the person whose card it was is dead. It’s still a crime, though, however innocuous it might seem, and I don’t think she should be allowed to win a million bucks because of it.
The fact that she has been using the card for a year seems to indicate she has been making payments.
Other facts (heavy drug user?) - indicate it unlikely that she has a good enough credit rating to get a credit card on her own.
So - assuming she had no other way to get a credit card, but was able to keep this one current, it sounds to me like someone who might at least be trying to get her act together.
Fraud? Yes. But if she was making payments, everything she bought (bread, milk, beer, cash advances for drugs and lottery tickets) was PAID FOR.
I can see the credit card company taking away her card, and if the State wants to, they could prosecute her for fraud, but her purchases were not stolen if she made payments and therefore, winning lottery ticket is no different from the purchase of the dozen eggs she paid for and ate last month.
The winnings are hers.
(It is a different story if dead mother-in-law’s Social Security checks were being used to pay for the credit card, but that was not mentioned.)
If she had been using the aunt’s credit card simply because she couldn’t secure a card on her own, but was making regular payments on it, then that’s one thing. It’s still fraud, of course, and she should still be prosecuted for it, but it’s not as vile as using your dead aunt’s card to buy shit you can’t afford (e.g. lottery tickets), with the intention of later ditching the card to shirk payment. Because then, not only has she committed fraud, but she’s also robbed the store.
But I don’t see evidence of the latter. Indeed, she must have been paying the monthly minimum, at least, in order for the card to be active a year and a half after auntie’s death. And that to me is somewhat mitigating.
Of course, I’m sure the law is clear on the matter and she’ll have to forfeit the dough. And I still reserve the right to smirk at her stupidity. But I’m not exactly gleeful about it.
Like I said before, the drug cops would keep the payout on the ticket if she was given the money.
Unless there is something in the fine print of the terms of the lottery specifically addressing credit card fraud, I guess I can’t help but think they should be separate issues. After all, if she had stolen or fraudulently obtained cash to buy the lottery ticket, wouldn’t they be separate issues?
I see her as a plausibly legitimate lottery winner as well as plausibly guilty of credit card fraud.