Gang member recruited accomplices on Instagram for a multimillion-dollar scheme, prosecutors say 14%

By Seamus Bozeman9%

7/17/2026, 10:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 19.6% saturation with 76 hits. Analysis detected 258 faulty-reasoning hits from 388 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 30.5% and a BS Rank of 14% (18,878 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 86.30% of the article peer group.

He posted an image of himself on Instagram holding a foot-high stack of currency. 
It was an ad for accomplices, federal prosecutors say, in a race-the-clock fraud scheme that raked in $2.8 million before law enforcement caught up. 
On Thursday, a member of the South L.A. 
Crips street gang was sentenced to nine years in federal prison in the scheme, the Justice Department said. 
Chase Matthew Griffin, 26, pleaded guilty in March to one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud. 
He was also ordered to pay $307,386 in restitution, the Justice Department said in a news release. 
The way the scheme worked, authorities said, was Griffin would use social media to advertise “for holders of various bank accounts to give him access to their accounts." 
The defendant and others stole checks from the mail, then altered them or created counterfeit versions so they appeared to be payable to the accomplices whom they’d recruited from social media. 
Griffin or a co-conspirator would deposit a fraudulent check, usually for “tens of thousands of dollars,” to an accomplice’s account, then race to withdraw the funds before the bank noticed the fraud. 
In one instance, in December 2023, a North Hollywood business reported that it had sent three checks worth $84,490 to a collection box in Tarzana. 
The checks never reached their destination and were deposited into a JPMorgan Chase account not associated with any of the intended recipients, the Justice Department said. 
A review by law enforcement of a Chase bank account where one of the checks was deposited showed that $22,487 was deposited in Upland. 
That check and another one for $29,081 were stolen “and used to create counterfeit checks with the same date, check number” and same amount as the original but with different payees, authorities said. 
Not long after the deposits, the money was quickly withdrawn  via ATM withdrawals, Zelle and CashApp payments, the purchase of a plane ticket, as well as card purchases at a San Bernardino County casino, the Justice Department said. 
Griffin, a.k.a. 
“Trey,” was an Atlanta resident who also lived in Ontario and South L.A., prosecutors said. 
He pleaded guilty March 5 to one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and had been in federal custody since September 2025. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 2.9%Confirmation Bias8.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 2.0%Daily Pilot: 3.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 1.4%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 4.8%Daily Pilot: 7.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 16.2%Seamus Bozeman: 10.3%Daily Pilot: 7.8%Negativity Bias16.2%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 3.8%Daily Pilot: 5.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 1.4%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 19.6%Seamus Bozeman: 5.7%Daily Pilot: 4.9%Appeal to Authority19.6%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 4.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 3.3%Daily Pilot: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.7%Daily Pilot: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 2.1%Daily Pilot: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.2%Seamus Bozeman: 4.5%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Unattributed Quote7.2%This article: 7.2%Seamus Bozeman: 1.2%Daily Pilot: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection7.2%This article: 8.2%Seamus Bozeman: 1.3%Daily Pilot: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice8.2%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 2.2%Daily Pilot: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Seamus Bozeman: 2.0%Daily Pilot: 4.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

388 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers52%attributed speech188writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coveragefederal prosecutors • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJustice Department • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJustice Department • 17 words • 0.0% coverageauthorities • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageJustice Department • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageauthorities • 33 words • 0.0% coverageJustice Department • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageprosecutors • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Justice Department

100%flagged-word coverage
100 attributed words50% of attributed speech34% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-17.0 ptsWriter: 17.0%Justice Department: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.