A woman has been jailed for two years and 8 months after fraudulently obtaining more than £40,000 by pretending to be her victim's romantic interest on Facebook.
Claudia Rodrigues introduced her female work colleague to 'Guilherme Costa' on Facebook and duped her into falling in love with the character she created, using a fake profile she set up and operated.
Rodrigues worked with the victim at a local cleaning company and the two became friends with the victim in her forties often referring to Rodrigues who was 24 at the time of the offences as her "daughter."
The pair were so close that Rodrigues was aware of the victim's financial circumstances and the fact she had £70,000 life savings.
In early December 2015 Rodrigues told the victim she knew a man who may be a potential love interest for her. What followed was a friend request from the fake profile in the name of 'Guilherme Costa' before the pair started conversing over Facebook. Over the next six months Rodrigues (pretending to be Costa) formed an intimate relationship with the victim. The pair shared messages proclaiming their love for each other and during the course of this 'relationship' the victim gave Rodrigues £42,360 believing it would go to Mr Costa to pay for his divorce and medical treatment for cancer.
Guernsey's Royal Court yesterday heard that Mr Costa did not exist and these were all lies made up by Rodrigues to fraudulently gain money.
Rodrigues was found guilty of six counts of fraud by false representation and one attempted fraud by false representation.
The court heard how requests for money came early into their online relationship with Costa saying in his messages that he had an inheritance of more than £600,000, but his wife controlled the purse strings and he needed money to divorce her so that he could get his hands on it. He said that the inheritance also included a car and a house.
The victim messaged the fake profile saying that she would loan him £10,000 and so on 7 December 2015 made a transfer to Rodrigues who said she would give the money to Mr Costa. The Royal Court heard how Rodrigues had taken a photo of £2,000 in £20 notes later that day as the image was saved in her phone. Mr Costa had said he worked at a local asset management company where Rodrigues cleaned and therefore it was arranged that a second £2,000 and further £5,000 be left in a hiding place for him while she was cleaning. The victim was told she was not allowed into the building where Costa worked as his wife also worked at the company.
On one such occasion, the court heard how a message to Rodrigues from the victim asked if she had delivered the money to Mr Costa. Rodrigues replied: "I put it in the hoover like last time."
These three transactions up to 14 December 2015 make up the charge for count one.
Further messages continued explaining that Mr Costa wished to put all the inheritance into the victim's name so that they could both be entitled to it. Following these communications a further £2,360 was given to Rodrigues on 3 January 2016 and this made up for count two.
The messages continued between the victim and the fake profile with Mr Costa continuing to talk about the cost of the divorce in between messages proclaiming his love for her. He said that almost everything was in her name now and she passed him another £1,000 via Rodrigues, which made up count three.
Mr Costa then messaged on 22 February 2016 to say that he was in Canada and £687,000 of his inheritance would soon be going into the victim's bank account. On 28 February he messaged to say he had been diagnosed with cancer and he was getting concerned about the money. He said: "You have too much money in your account so mine won't go in." He once again reiterated that along with the money the inheritance included a house and a car and that the victim should put the money in another account; in the account of someone she trusted.
Further messages to the victim said that the divorce was now finalised while the fake profile also went on to say he was going to undergo further tests and chemotherapy. Following these conversations the victim transferred £5,000 direct to Rodrigues and then withdrew a further £5,000 which she handed straight to Rodrigues for Mr Costa. This £10,000 makes up count four.
After further conversations a further £10,000 was transferred from the victim into Rodrigues bank account which makes up count five. Yet again a picture of large amounts of money was taken at this time by Rodrigues and saved on her phone.
By 9 April 2016 the appeals for money were still coming with messages from Mr Costa saying: "Love I need your help, get your little daughter to help. I will be the happiest person in the world." Three further transactions totalling £10,000 on 21 April, 3 May and 10 May 2016 make up for count six.
Messages from Mr Costa to the victim continued with luring messages. The court heard the tone of such interactions with one message saying: "I love you my goddess." Within this conversation the need for more money was brought up and the victim once again went to her bank to transfer money to Rodrigues.
This time the bank raised concerns and questioned the victim so much so that she messaged Rodriques to say she was shaking as the bank were asking so many questions. This was on 31 May and the concerns led the bank to call Guernsey Police and investigate the Facebook profile of Mr Costa.
On 3 June, Rodrigues was arrested and a number of mobile phones were recovered
The court heard how even after her arrest she continued to lie and said that Mr Costa had returned home to Guernsey and even transferred a number of Euros back to the victims account, which amounted to £5,698.97.
Rodrigues was interviewed with an advocate on 4 July 2016, but refused to give a response. Due to her not pleading guilty the police had to gather evidence and facts relating to the case.
The court heard how the charges related to a period of time from 1 December 2015 to 30 June 2016 and that the fake Facebook profile had been set up by Rodrigues on 30 November 2015 from her own phone. Further investigations were made through Sure who confirmed the IP address for all messages belonged to Rodrigues and that the number given in the fake 'Mr Costa' profile was an invalid number. The court was told that victim had lost a total of £36,661.03 taking into account the transfer back in Euros.
Defending Rodrigues, Advocate Roffey said that his client was aware of the gravity of the seven counts and there was little he could say to mitigate the facts. He iterated that prior to this offence his client had never appeared in any court and was a person of previous impeccable character. He further told the court that Rodrigues had spared her victim the prospect of a trial by finally entering a guilty plea on 1 February 2018.
He continued to tell the court that Rodrigues was just 24 at the time of the offences and was struggling with the position she was now in. He told the court of a number of personal circumstances where Rodrigues had already paid a high price for her actions as further mitigation.
In passing sentence Judge Russell Finch said that the facts were somewhat unusual and addressed Rodrigues saying: "You lied to the victim and told her you felt like a daughter. You told her about a non existent man who needed money to divorce his wife and have treatment for cancer. You then went on to set up a false Facebook profile of this man."
Judge Finch went on to state how the victim was not well off and now she had lost most of her money. He said: "You even contacted her after your arrest with more lies, numerous breaches of trust. The aggravating features are sustained leaching off of your co-worker who trusted you. Being gullible is not something that can be held against her."
"This was callous with continued lying we are thoroughly disgusted with your actions it was a sustained and wicked exploitation."
Rodrigues, 26, was sentenced to a total of two years and eight months for all six counts of fraud and the one of attempted fraud. The court also heard that Rodrigues had only tenuous links to the Bailiwick with a boyfriend on island but no other family so deportation was in the public interest. Judge Finch said: "This was a prolonged course of serious dishonesty; we put forward a recommendation for deportation with His Excellency."
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.