Federal Romance Scam Charges

Welcome to Spodek Law Group. What we need to explain here is the reality of federal romance scam charges - not the simplified version consumer protection agencies present, not the "just don't send money" advice that ignores the complexity of emotional manipulation, but the actual truth about what happens when the Department of Justice decides that your heartbreak qualifies as wire fraud. Because here is the central paradox that nobody in government publications will tell you directly: the deeper you fell for the romance scam, the more evidence federal prosecutors have against you. Every wire transfer you made "for love" is a separate federal count. Your devotion to someone who never existed becomes their proof of your guilt.

This is not a metaphor. This is how the federal criminal justice system operates. An 81-year-old grandmother named Glenda appeared in an FBI public service announcement after pleading guilty to two federal felonies in November 2021. She was a victim of a romance scam who fell in love with someone online, believed his stories, and moved money at his request. The FBI did not feature her to celebrate her exoneration. They featured her to warn others that victim status and defendant status are not mutually exclusive categories. She was both.

The question that brings most people to articles like this one is some version of: "Can they really charge ME? I was the one who got scammed." The answer contains more legal complexity than any single article can address, but the foundational principle is this - federal prosecutors do not evaluate your case based on your emotional experience. They evaluate your bank records. And your bank records do not show heartbreak, betrayal, or manipulation. Your bank records show wire transfers, often international, often structured in ways that trigger Suspicious Activity Reports, often fitting patterns that investigators see in money laundering conspiracies. To the prosecutor reviewing your file, you look indistinguishable from a knowing money mule.

Why Your "Victim" Status Wont Save You in Federal Court

Heres the thing most people get wrong about federal prosecution. There isnt a checkbox on the indictment form that says "check here if defendant was emotionally manipulated." Wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 requires proof that you participated in a scheme to defraud using interstate electronic communications. Money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1956 requires proof that you conducted financial transactions involving proceeds of unlawful activity. Notice whats missing from both statutes - any requirement that you knew the full scope of the scheme, or that you benefited personally, or that your intentions were malicious.

What prosecutors look for is conduct. Did you recieve wire transfers? Did you send them forward? Did you use banks, Western Union, cryptocurrency exchanges, or other financial infrastructure to move funds? If yes to any of these, the elements are satisfied. Your emotional state is a sentencing consideration, maybe. Its not a defense to the charges themselves.

Todd Spodek has explained this to countless clients who arrive at consultations believing their story will make the charges dissapear. The story matters - it matters for negotiating plea agreements, for arguing sentencing departures, for humanizing you to a judge who will ultimatly decide your fate. But it does not make the underlying conduct legal. Moving money at the direction of fraudsters, regardless of why you believed you were doing it, constitutes participation in the fraud.

How Every Love Message Became a Federal Count

Think about the progression of a typical romance scam relationship. You meet someone online. The conversation moves to text messages, WhatsApp, email. There is emotional intimacy, vulnerability, the feeling that you have finally found someone who understands you. And then, gradualy at first, the requests begin. A small amount for an emergency. Then larger amounts for a business opportunity, a medical crisis, a legal problem that requires immediate funds.

Each time you sent money, you probably felt like you were helping someone you loved. What you were actualy doing, in the eyes of federal law, was using interstate wire communications to transfer funds in furtherance of a fraudulent scheme. The fact that you didnt know it was fraudulent is where the legal doctrine of "willful blindness" becomes relevant - and devastating to your defense.

Heres were it gets complicated. Willful blindness is the legal principle that you cannot escape liability by deliberately avoiding knowledge of obvious warning signs. If a reasonable person in your situation would have been suspicious - if the requests were escalating, if the excuses kept changing, if you never video-called the person or met them in person - prosecutors can argue that your failure to investigate constitutes deliberate ignorance. And deliberate ignorance, under federal law, is treated the same as actual knowledge.

This is the trap within the trap. The scammer designed the relationship to make you trust them completly. That trust, which felt like love, looks like negligence in a courtroom. Your devotion becomes evidence of your failure to exercise due diligence. Every message where you said "I trust you" or "dont worry, Ill help" becomes an exhibit in the governments case.

The FBI Interview That Ends Your Defense

When the FBI contacts you about a romance scam investigation, they present themselves as helpful. Theyre investigating fraud. They want to understand what happened to you. Many victims believe this is their opportunity to explain, to be heard, to finally talk to someone who will pursue the real criminals.

What you need to understand is this: the FBI interview is not for your benefit. The agents conducting that interview are evaluating whether YOU should be charged. Every word you say is being documented. Your explanations become evidence. Your admissions - "yes, I sent money to that account" - establish the elements of the offense.

Consider the psychology of what happens in that room. Youve been victimized, your ashamed, youve probly been hiding this from family and friends for months or years. Now official law enforcement wants to hear your story. The relief of finally telling someone can overwhelm any sense of caution. You might volunteer information they didnt even ask about. You might try to explain every transaction, every reason you believed, every time you should have been suspicious but werent.

And thats exactly what prosecutors need. They need you to admit the conduct. They need you to explain your state of mind. They need documentation of your awareness of red flags - because that awareness, even if you dismissed it at the time, proves you werent fully unknowing. An unknowing participant is hard to prosecute. Someone who admits they had doubts but kept sending money anyway? Thats willful blindness in your own words.

At Spodek Law Group, we tell clients something that sounds counterintuitive but is absolutly critical: do not talk to federal agents without an attorney present. We know you want to explain. We know you believe the truth will set you free. But in federal investigations, the truth you volunteer often becomes the cage that traps you. Talk to us first. Let us talk to them.

What "Willful Blindness" Realy Means for Your Case

Lets break this down with specificity becuase the stakes are too high for generalities. The legal standard comes from Supreme Court precedent and has been applied in fraud cases for decades. Willful blindness exists when a person subjectively believes that there is a high probability of illegal conduct but takes deliberate actions to avoid learning the truth.

OK so think about what that means in a romance scam context. Did you ever wonder why your "partner" couldnt video call? Did you ever question why they needed money sent to third-party accounts? Did you ever google their photos and find they belonged to someone else? Did you ever notice the grammar in their messages seemed inconsistent with their claimed background?

If yes to any of these - and you continued anyway - you have willful blindness exposure. Not definite conviction, but exposure. Something prosecutors can argue.

The devastating reality is that romance scam victims often DO have these moments of doubt. The scammers are good at what they do, but theyre not perfect. Red flags appear. What happens in the victims psychology is a process of rationalization - they explain away the inconsistencies because the alternative (admitting they were fooled) is too painful. But that rationalization, that decision to keep believing despite evidence, is exactly what willful blindness describes.

In federal court, you dont need to be an accountant to know money laundering is wrong. You dont need a law degree to sense that moving $50,000 for someone youve never met might be suspicious. The question isnt whether you had specialized knowledge. The question is whether you had enough information to be suspicious - and chose not to look closer.

The 81-Year-Old Woman Who Pleaded Guilty

Glendas story deserves more attention then a passing reference becuase it illustrates everything about how this system works. She was 81 years old when she pleaded guilty on November 2, 2021 to two federal felonies. She wasnt a sophisticated criminal. She wasnt greedy. She was lonely, she met someone online who made her feel valued, and she helped him with money transfers because she believed she was helping the man she loved.

Read that again. 81 years old. Two federal felonies.

The FBI used her case in a public service announcement about money mules. She agreed to appear because she wanted others to understand what she didnt - that federal law doesnt have an exception for love, for loneliness, for the human need for connection. She became a felon because she moved money. The circumstances of why she moved money were secondary to the fact that she did.

Think about what Glenda probly experienced in those final months before her plea. The shame of realizing she had been deceived. The terror of facing federal prosecution. The impossability of explaining to her family how she, an 81-year-old grandmother, was now a criminal defendant. And then the calculation that every federal defendant faces - do I go to trial and risk a worse outcome, or do I plead guilty and accept the certainty of a conviction?

Glenda pleaded guilty. Most federal defendants do. The conviction rate in federal court exceeds 90%. Thats not because the government only charges guilty people. Its because the system is designed to encourage pleas - the sentencing guidelines punish people who go to trial and lose, rewarding those who accept responsbility early.

The Money Mule Warning Letter - And What Happens After

Heres the part nobody talks about in detail. The Department of Justice has developed a specific strategy for dealing with romance scam money mules that creates a legal trap most victims dont see coming.

When the FBI identifies you as a potential money mule, they may conduct an interview AND provide you with what they call a "Money Mule Warning Letter." This letter explicitly informs you that your activities constitute money laundering, that you are participating in criminal conduct, and that continued participation will result in prosecution.

Let that sink in.

Before the warning letter, prosecutors have to prove willful blindness - that you should have known. After the warning letter, they have documented proof that you DID know. If you continue moving money after recieving that letter - maybe because the scammer convinces you its a misunderstanding, maybe because youve already sent so much youre afraid to stop - you have eliminated any possible unknowing-participant defense.

The scammers know this too. Heres the psychological genius of their operation. Once youve moved significant money, theyre have leverage over you. They can threaten to expose you, to report you, to make sure you face consequences. Some victims continue not because they still believe the romance is real, but because they fear that stopping will somehow draw more attention then continuing. This is wrong - stopping immediately is always the right decision - but the fear is understandable.

What you absolutly cannot do is receive a federal warning letter and then convince yourself that the letter doesnt apply to you, that your situation is different, that love will somehow provide legal immunity. It wont.

Federal Sentencing: 42 Months to 10 Years

The sentencing for romance scam money laundering charges varies based on multiple factors, but lets look at real numbers from real cases to understand the range:

In March 2024, a woman from Aubrey, Texas was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison and ordered to pay $2.2 million in restitution for defrauding elderly victims in romance schemes. Ten years. In September 2025, a Nigerian citizen recieved 42 months - thats 3.5 years - for laundering proceeds from romance scams targeting elderly Americans. A final defendant in Utah recieved 72 months - six years - and was ordered to pay $6.4 million in restitution jointly with co-defendants.

The federal sentencing guidelines calculate your offense level based on the amount of money involved, your role in the offense, whether you accept responsibility through an early guilty plea, and numerous other factors. Theres a formula, and the formula produces recommended sentencing ranges measured in months.

Do not assume that your sympathetic circumstances will override these calculations. They might factor into a downward variance - judges do have discretion - but the starting point is the guidelines, and the guidelines for money laundering involving hundreds of thousands of dollars are severe.

Restitution is the other devastation waiting in your future. Even if you never kept a penny of the money you moved - even if you sent every dollar forward exactly as the scammer instructed - you can be held jointly and severaly liable for the total victim losses. That means if the scheme cost victims $500,000, you owe $500,000. Not your share. The whole amount. This can follow you through bankruptcy, through wage garnishment, through Social Security offset. It doesnt go away.

What a Federal Defense Attorney Does First

If youre reading this article because youve already recieved contact from federal investigators - or worse, because youve been indicted - heres what needs to happen immedietly.

First, stop talking. Stop talking to investigators, stop talking to family members about the details (family members can be subpoenaed as witnesses), stop posting on social media about your situation. Everything you say can become evidence.

Second, get representation before your first interview. If the FBI wants to talk to you, they will wait for your attorney. If they say they wont wait, thats actually not true - they will. A good federal defense attorney will communicate with investigators on your behalf, will be present for any interviews, and will prevent you from making the mistakes that turn victims into convicts.

Third, understand that this is a federal case, not a state case. Federal prosecution is a different machine. The resources are different, the conviction rates are different, the sentencing is different. You need an attorney who handles federal criminal defense specificaly, not someone who primarily does state court work.

At Spodek Law Group, Todd Spodek and our team have handled federal wire fraud and money laundering cases involving exactly these circumstances - clients who came to us believing they were victims, only to discover they were targets. We understand both the legal reality and the human reality. We know that shame and embarrassment make this particularily difficult to discuss, even with your own lawyer. And we know that the prosecution doesnt care about your feelings - they care about your bank records.

The call you need to make is 212-300-5196.

This is not about whether you deserve whats happening. The criminal justice system isnt always about deserving. Its about what can be proven, what statutes apply, and how aggressively prosecution decides to proceed. What we can do is fight for the best possible outcome given your actual circumstances - which may include avoiding charges entirely if the investigation is early enough, negotiating a favorable plea if charges are unavoidable, or presenting the full picture of your victimization at sentencing if conviction occurs.

The FTC reported over 70,000 romance scam cases in 2022 alone, with losses exceeding $1.3 billion. The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center documented $389 million in losses from confidence fraud targeting people over 60 in 2024. These arent small numbers. These represent real people who thought they found love and instead found themselves facing federal investigators, asset seizures, and the possibility of prison. The government is paying attention to this crime category. The resources they are dedicating to prosecution are increasing. And the tools they use to identify money mules - bank records analysis, cryptocurrency tracing, international cooperation with foreign law enforcement - are getting more sophisticated every year.

But we cant help if we dont know. And the longer you wait, the fewer options remain.

They had years to build thier case. You have days to respond. Use them.

Call 212-300-5196.