Unlawful identity theft happens when a pretender steals another individual’s name and private data. The data may include the date of birth, social security number or name. The thief may show to the police force a fake license comprising another individual’s information (Barnard-Wills, 2011). Often, but not at all times, the pretender falsely attained a driver’s license or ID in the object’s name and offered that documentation to the police. Or the thief, without presenting any photograph credentials, misuses the name of a colleague or acquaintance. Therefore, an identity theft is a crime, and the criminals should be punished even in the case when they do not cause any monetary damage. In numerous examples, the thief is penalized for a traffic violation or an offense and is out from the confinement. The thief signs the documents and pledges to show up in court. If the pretender fails to appear in the law court, the judge may issue a warrant, but it will be under the theft object’s credentials and legal name.
Even though the law agencies recognize the commonness of identity theft, these crimes are evidencing bizarrely problematic to avert, and they are happening with growing occurrence (Whiting, 2013). The total size of the data traded on the internet daily produces breaches for hackers and other technologically knowledgeable offenders to steal information without being exposed. Correspondingly, once these online crimes are revealed, the police are repeatedly incapable of finding and arresting the persons in charge. This may be due, to some extent, to the circumstance that a great part of the identity stealers is supposed to be living out of the country.
The identity theft target may not realize there is a chance of being arrested because of the imposter. The victim may be stopped, detained, and taken to the penitentiary without preceding announcement due to the unresolved warrant (Identity Theft, n.d.). It may as well happen that the thief will show up in court for the road traffic or malfeasance and negotiate without the theft victim being conscious of this incident. Some identity stealing targets, unconscious of the prior illegal activity by the pretender, may find out that there was a case of the impersonation when the individual is deprived of service or fired. In these examples, the company conducted a circumstantial examination and had counted on the felonious past found under the person’s data. It is also important that the company is officially obliged to notify the victim of the motive for the denunciation of employment. Regrettably, all the responsibility lies on the victim’s name, so the target of theft has to act rapidly and forcefully to diminish the harm. Nonetheless, the accountability to edit the inaccurate information in the numerous law enforcement databases and structures is to the officers occupied within the system. There are no conventional measures for editing an individual’s incorrect criminal record.
Regarding the state identity theft statutes, any of the subsequent evidence is well thought-out to be particularly classifying data in Illinois: an individual’s name, living address, cell phone number, workplace information, savings account or credit card number, individual or electronic ID number, various credentials, and any other records or data which can be used to log into or exploit an individual’s monetary possessions, or to detect a certain person, or his or her activities, incoming and outgoing messages and calls, or other actions or communications (Identity Theft State’s Statutory Information, n.d.). A personal ID comprises any documentation created or distributed by a legislative unit that is projected for the determination of proving the identity of a person, or any such file that misleadingly signifies to have been made in the best interests of or delivered to another individual.
In Illinois, an individual is an identity thief when he or she perceptively uses any private identifying data or personal proof of identity of another individual to dishonestly acquire recognition, money, private property, or services (Identity Theft State’s Statutory Information, n.d.). An individual is also considered a thief in case if he or she exploits any private material or the ID of another person with the intention of committing any offense not mentioned above. The person is guilty of identity theft if he or she operates, transmits, or owns paper-production gear to create false IDs or false papers realizing that they will be exploited by the individual or another person to commit any crime. Identity theft regularly goes before other kinds of scam and monetary criminalities (Identity Theft State’s Statutory Information, n.d.).
Along with the elementary identity theft, Illinois similarly proscribes the intensified type of the crime, which arises when an individual steals identity from a person aged 60 or older, an individual with ill health, or in the maintenance of the actions of an organized mob. Regarding to the elementary and intensified types of identity theft, the law states that the defending individual’s knowledge will be evaluated in a form of an assessment of all conditions of his or her use of the other individual’s private materials or evidence. Identity theft arrests in Illinois include almost the full range of lawbreaking offenses.
The notion of identity theft is closely related to the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. The 14th amendment was central in returning the Confederacy into the US subsequent to the Civil War. The US took charge of the retirement funds for the armed forces that took part in the conflict and rejected to take on the unpaid sums of the Confederate, while as well averting past Confederate frontrunners from holding voted agency or public positions (14th Amendment, n.d.). The 14th Amendment correspondingly guaranteed that debts were not permitted owing to the liberation of slaves. The Due Process section defends the 1st Amendment civil rights of the individuals and prevents those privileges from being annulled by any administration without “due process.” Due process is a probation by judges for all the individuals accused of a crime.
The 14th Amendment particularly imposes the Bill of Rights on the government, to verify that it can never bound the constitutional rights of Americans without justice (What Is the Fourteenth Amendment and What Does It Mean, n.d.). The 14th Amendment should be looked upon in the case of an identity theft as every accused individual has the same rights as any other individual until proved guilty. The Equal Protection part of the 14th Amendment pledges that the accused will not face any discernment by the law. The national administration imposes this fortification on the States, certifying that they do not. The Equal Protection section protracted this defense to the state administrations.
Identity theft crimes are an important area of the US legal system and should be taken very seriously. Despite the fact that these wrongdoings are punishable, and there have been numerous cases of identity theft, all the US citizens have their civil rights, and both the victim and identity thief can rely on the 14th Amendment. It should be noted that the number of identity theft crimes grows due to the inability to arrest or at least locate the criminals, but the victims can count of the fair judgment and impartiality in the court.
References
14th Amendment. (n.d.). Web.
Barnard-Wills, D. (2011). Surveillance and Identity: Discourse, Subjectivity and the State. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Group.
Identity Theft State’s Statutory Information. (n.d.). Web.
Identity Theft. (n.d.). Web.
What Is the Fourteenth Amendment and What Does It Mean (n.d.). Web.
Whiting, J. (2013). Identity Theft. San Diego, CA: ReferencePoint Press.