Fraud Suspect | Fraud Suspect Accused of Loan Deception

The borrowers later labeled as a fraud suspect presented business plans, supplier contracts, and operating records when obtaining the loan. 

These materials confirmed an active and functioning business. 

The fraud suspect also repaid interest and principal consistently for an extended period, undermining any allegation that they borrowed funds with no intention to repay.

SJKP established that the dispute was civil in nature. 

A fraud suspectcan only be convicted if prosecutors prove deception occurred at the time of the loan. 

Because the lender had already recovered substantial amounts through repayments, SJKP argued that this was a business downturn not criminal deception.

New York courts require that a fraud suspect intentionally mislead the lender. 

SJKP referenced precedent establishing that inability to repay due to later events cannot be considered deception. 

The fraud suspect had both intent and capacity to repay at the time of borrowing, supported by business documentation and repayment history.

SJKP demonstrated the following:

• No deception occurred at the time of the loan.
• The lender did not experience actual financial loss.
• Repayment history disproved the notion of fraudulent intent.

Based on these findings, the fraud suspectcould not be held criminally liable.

The defense centered on proving that the fraud suspect had repayment ability and intent when the loan was made. 

Business plans, purchase orders, invoices, and tax filings confirmed legitimate operational needs for the borrowed funds. 

This evidence directly contradicted the lender’s claim that the borrowers acted with malicious intent.

SJKP demonstrated that the lender had already recovered all principal and substantial interest payments. 

Therefore, the fraud suspect did not cause financial harm an essential elementin proving fraud. 

Without harm, the fraud allegation could not survive legal scrutiny.

The court concluded:

• The fraud suspect had repayment intent at the time of borrowing.
• The lender suffered no actual financial loss.
• Business difficulties do not equate to criminal deception.

These findings confirmed the defense’s positionand secured a favorable outcome.

Fraud cases often hinge on subtle distinctions in intent and financial conduct. 

Without experienced representation, a fraud suspect may face unnecessary criminal exposure. 

SJKP’s intervention prevented wrongful conviction and preserved the clients’ reputations.