Running with the Cons

I’ve always enjoyed the genre of story of the ‘noble’ criminal.  The thieves that have reformed and are using their talents for good or at least you can really like them as they use their talents for bad.  Examples such as Oceans Eleven, Leverage, Hustle, etc.

But watching the shows there is always the criminal patois going on that, while very cool, I just didn’t understand.  So I started to poke around and learn what some of it meant.

My first foray was to learn more about the basic types of confidence scams.  There is A LOT of different types of confidence scams, but here are some of the basic ones:

The Ponzi Scheme:

Fake investments.  The con-artist uses some of the money from new ‘investors’ to provide ‘dividends’ to the other investors to make them believe their investments are prospering.  Meanwhile the con-artist steals any of the money coming into the con that he doesn’t need to keep the marks convinced.

The Spanish Prisoner:

Advance fee fraud.  The con-artist tricks the mark into believing that a ‘modest’ investment now will result in a big payday down the road.  Unlike the Ponzi Scheme this is a take the money and run con not requiring the long-term commitment of a Ponzi scheme.

The False Samaritan:

The con-artist’s version of good cop, bad cop.  The “bad” artist runs an action on the mark and the “good” artist, acting as an innocent third-party, intervenes to ‘save’ the mark.  At basic levels this could be a simple mugging where the good artist scares away and recovers the stolen property in hopes of a reward.  More complex cons may use the False Samaritan to place the good artist into a position where the mark trusts or feels obligated to her to set up a larger con.

Three-Card Monte / Shell Game:

One of the oldest short cons.  This uses gambling and slight of hand to assure the mark is unable to pick the winning option.  The artist may often use associates to support the con such as false ‘winners’ for the mark to observe or a ‘friend’ for the mark to give them tips so the artist can better control their picks.

The Badger Game:

Forced blackmail.  In the Badger game the artist causes the mark to be caught in a compromising situation.  This is a favorite of female artists who can target a wealthy married man, seduce him, and retains evidence of the infidelity for purposes of blackmailing the mark.  Usually the artist will work with a partner that will ‘catch’ the mark red-handed, often in the roll of the an angry husband.

The Wire Game:

Faked insider information.  This is one of the most elaborate of the classic cons, it involves a large number of artists.  The con-artists set up a legitimate appearing operation, usually involving betting or trading.  The mark is brought in to see/use the office which operates legitimately.  One of the artist then provides ‘insider’ information to the mark who rushes to the operation to place a huge bet/trade.  But the operation diverts the money, the bet/trade is never really made.  The mark is feed false information about the event causing the mark to think they have lost, usually in some way that will make them reluctant to discuss the event with people where they may uncover the con.  Of course if they do it will be to late anyway.

The Thai Gem Scam:

Inflated worth con.  This is another elaborate con requiring a number of artists to work together.  In its basic format each artist provides the mark a bit of information in a manner where it seems like coincidental isolated events but when taken together presents the mark with a great opportunity.  This type of con was made famous in Bangkok where the first artist would present themself as a friendly local and suggest the mark, a tourist, that they take advantage of the ‘fact’ that taxis are required to take tourists to local tourist attractions for free as part of a government program to increase tourism.  The taxi driver is another artist and takes them to several tourist locations, at each location another artist is waiting to be ‘randomly’ encountered to provide another bit of the lie.  That a legislative mistake temporarily made exporting gems tariff free, etc.  The taxi driver, or another artist will be able to provide the location of a gem store that can ship the gems for the tourist.  When the tourist gets home and retrieves the gems they find they are worthless, and that the con-artists are far, far, away.

The Pig in a Poke:

The substitution con.  This is another very old con.  The original version, for which it’s named, is from the middle ages, where the artist would sell the mark a piglet.  The pig would be placed in a burlap sack for the buyer’s convenience.  With a distraction the sack would be replaced with a sack with another live but much less valuable animal in it, such as a dog or cat.  Modern versions of course usually don’t involve a pig, but any valuables where the item can be packaged and then the real valuable substituted for a fake and the artist escapes before the mark realizes the change.

The Fiddle Game:

The greedy con.  This con relies on the greediness of the mark and requires two artists to execute.  The first artist arranges to ‘find’ himself embarrassingly short of cash for something they have already bought and used (such as a meal at a restaurant).  They promise to pay as soon as possible and leave an object (the fiddle) as collateral.  After they have left (to get their wallet, go to the ATM, et) the second artist, professing to be an expert in the type of object involved asks to see exam the object in more detail.  The second artist becomes excited, professing that the item is rare and valuable.  ‘Unfortunately’ they can’t stay for the owners return, but would the mark be so good to ask the owner when they return to contact them as they would like to buy the object.  The greedy mark doesn’t give the message to the owner, instead they buy the object from the owner for much less that the ‘expert’ indicated it was worth.  When the mark ties to locate the expert to sell it object themselves the expert is nowhere to be found, and now neither is the original owner.

Salting / Moneybox scheme:

Now you see it, now you don’t.  These are a category of confidence schemes where the con-artist arranges a situation where the mark will see that an object can produce a desired effect.  Unfortunately for the mark its actually just a thin covering that will quickly run out, although not before the artist has escaped.  The classic of this category is salting the mine, where a gemstones or precious metals are planted in an area and the mark is given the opportunity to buy the ‘rich’ land.  Another derivative of this is to demonstrate that a device can perform in a certain way, the device is sold but the owner discovers that it was rigged to only work a few times.  A well-known example of this was count Victor Lustig who sold a counterfeiting machine after demonstrating it printing out several hundred dollar bills.  The machine didn’t actually counterfeit the bills, the count had loaded several real bills into it on top of the stack of blank pages.