ILNews

District courts warn of new juror scam

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Once again, the federal courts are warning of a juror scam designed to trick unsuspecting people into giving their personal information.

At least 14 federal District courts have received reports of local residents receiving an email notifying them of their selection for jury duty and demanding they return a form with such information as Social Security and driver’s license numbers, date of birth, cell phone number and mother’s maiden name.

Moreover, the email warned that anyone who failed to provide the information would have to explain the failure to the court and could be penalized with fines and jail time. The email falsely claimed that it was affiliated with eJuror, an online registration program used in about 80 U.S. court districts.

The email is fraudulent. Anyone receiving an email like this should contact their local federal court.

Such scams are not new. The federal courts have been used in these types of cons since 2004, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation has released three warnings since 2005.

“The criminals are trying to cloak themselves in the authority of the court to try to squeeze valuable information out of people,” said a spokesman for the U.S. Courts. “People have to be on alert.”

Within the last month, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana has received reports from two people who received phone calls telling them they had missed federal jury selection and asking them for their financial information, according to Laura Briggs, court clerk.  

Also, six months ago, the Southern District got a report that someone had received an arrest warrant on what looked like letterhead from the federal courts. The document asked for personal information and provided a phone number the recipient could call to settle the debt.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana has not gotten any reports of suspicious emails or arrest warrants from local residents, said Kurt Koch, manager for the Hammond and Lafayette divisions.  

The federal courts reiterated that eJuror never requests personal identification information be sent directly in an email response. Requests by courts to complete a qualification questionnaire would be initiated by formal written correspondence. These letters would then tell jury participants how to access an authenticated, secure online connection.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT