A man and a woman pleaded guilty on Monday to charges of fraud and extortion brought against them by the Public Prosecutor’s Office. By admitting their guilt and contributing to the partial restitution of the damage to the victims (by returning part of the money defrauded), the Provincial Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife issued a compliance ruling that significantly reduces the initial penalties sought by the prosecution.
The two defendants were part of a ring dedicated to internet fraud and extortion schemes that they advertised online. The ruling set a penalty of two years in prison for the primary defendant on the fraud charge, while for five counts of extortion, he received three months for each, totalling three years and three months in prison. The woman was sentenced to one year in prison. Additionally, both agreed to jointly repay the €64,000 demanded by the victims.
The agreement marked a significant reduction from the initial request by the prosecution, which sought four and a half years in prison for the man on the fraud charge and 15 years for extortion, along with a fine of €1,800. For the woman, the prosecution was seeking three years and three months in prison and a fine of €2,000, which now remains in place.
Furthermore, both prison sentences were suspended on the condition that the man does not reoffend for five years and the woman for three years. The extraordinary reduction and suspension for the main defendant were agreed upon despite his recidivism, as the court determined that he was a drug addict currently undergoing rehabilitation and had partially compensated the victims by paying back some of the money before the trial. Additionally, he must complete eight months of community service.
Illegal Services Advertised
According to the established facts, the defendants posted advertisements online offering illicit access to third-party accounts, mobile phones, emails, or administrative platforms. They charged amounts ranging from €20 to €15,000 for these purported services. The investigation confirmed that they published 40 advertisements under various identities and utilised up to 38 email accounts and 24 phone numbers to obscure their connections. The primary defendant handled client requests, while the woman collected the money for services that, according to the ruling, were never delivered.
When victims requested refunds for the money they paid, the defendants threatened to disclose their intentions to the account holders, phone numbers, or affected profiles. In other instances, after receiving an initial payment, they sought further sums to complete the alleged services.
The accused also accessed the victims’ accounts using the information provided to them. They then coerced these individuals to demand more money under the threat of revealing their intentions.
Among the victims was someone who paid €420 to obtain information about a mobile device; another who paid €290 to access police databases; and a third who handed over €650 to find out who was making calls from a blocked number. There were also clients who paid €850 to access their partner’s device or €250 to delete photographs and videos that affected their reputation.
