Passenger Trains > Former Amtrak Employee Pleads Guilty to Wire Fraud

Former Amtrak Employee Pleads Guilty to Wire Fraud 

NEW ORLEANS – U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans announced today that KENYA BUTLER-SMALL pleaded guilty on February 23, 2022 to two counts of wire fraud for conduct that occurred while she was employed by Amtrak as an On-board Services Train Attendant.

One wire fraud count relates to a scheme in which BUTLER-SMALL recruited more than 40 victims to spots on a purported June 2019 trip from New Orleans to New York City.  BUTLER-SMALL told the victims that she had booked round-trip Amtrak train travel for the trip, as well as activities, such as shows and museum visits.  In truth, BUTLER-SMALL had not booked the Amtrak travel or the activities.  When the date of the trip approached, BUTLER-SMALL told the victims, from whom she had taken a total of approximately $23,000 to $26,000, that Amtrak had canceled the trip because an incident occurred in which one of the trip’s passengers assaulted an Amtrak employee and made a bomb threat.  In truth, no such incident had occurred.

The other wire fraud count is related to a scheme in which BUTLER-SMALL submitted fraudulent sick benefit claims to the Railroad Retirement Board, a federal agency that provides benefits to Amtrak employees.  BUTLER-SMALL claimed that she was too sick to work when, in truth, she was working another job.  This caused the government to pay BUTLER-SMALL approximately $4,679 in sick benefits for days she falsely claimed to have been unable to work.

BUTLER-SMALL is scheduled to be sentenced on June 15, 2022, by U.S. District Judge Sarah S. Vance.  The maximum penalties for each count are up to 20 years imprisonment, up to three years of supervised release, a fine of up to $250,000, and a $100 mandatory special  assessment fee.

This case was investigated by the Amtrak Office of Inspector General and the Railroad Retirement Board Office of Inspector General. Assistant U.S. Attorney Chandra Menon is in charge of the prosecution.

 *     *     *Attachment(s): 

Download butler-small_kenya_rev_factual_basis.pdf
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edla/press-release/file/1477086/download
  
Topic(s): Financial FraudComponent(s): USAO - Louisiana, Eastern



https://www.justice.gov/usao-edla/pr/former-amtrak-employee-pleads-guilty-wire-fraud


Prior TO thread:

https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,5387125,5387163#msg-5387163



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/22 14:29 by GenePoon.

I predict the penalties will be light. From my past experience with Housing & Urban Development, I know their IG office won't even touch a case for under $10,000. She's only in for about $30,000 and it doesn't sound like there were any priors. So, on the "sliding scale of sentencing", punishment will probably be minor.

TJY

icancmp193 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I predict the penalties will be light. From my
> past experience with Housing & Urban Development,
> I know their IG office won't even touch a case for
> under $10,000. She's only in for about $30,000 and
> it doesn't sound like there were any priors. So,
> on the "sliding scale of sentencing", punishment
> will probably be minor.
>
> TJY

Why would your experience with Housing & Urban Development be applicable to Amtrak?  Not only may your past experience with Housing & Urban Development different with that agency's current disciplinary practices, but Housing & Urban Development is a very different organization than Amtrak.  Accordingly, there is no reason to believe that their approaches to discipline would be the same.

RuleG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> icancmp193 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I predict the penalties will be light. From my
> > past experience with Housing & Urban
> Development,
> > I know their IG office won't even touch a case
> for
> > under $10,000. She's only in for about $30,000
> and
> > it doesn't sound like there were any priors.
> So,
> > on the "sliding scale of sentencing",
> punishment
> > will probably be minor.
> >
> > TJY
>
> Why would your experience with Housing & Urban
> Development be applicable to Amtrak?  Not only
> may your past experience with Housing & Urban
> Development different with that agency's current
> disciplinary practices, but Housing & Urban
> Development is a very different organization than
> Amtrak.  Accordingly, there is no reason to
> believe that their approaches to discipline would
> be the same.

Because, in the end, most government (or quasi-government) agencies follow similar practices (i.e. the initial bark is worse than the bite). It will be interesting to follow this case and see where it goes. Two 20-year prison terms and $500,000 in fines? I think not even close.

TJY

Pleading guilty often means a plea deal has been agreed to. 

In the 70s the Federal Prosecutor would not touch any case under $10,000.  Small change in their mind.  The best thing we did was to threaten prosecution, and hoped that the employee would resign.  There was also the employee discipline process for union employees.  

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the 70s the Federal Prosecutor would not touch
> any case under $10,000.  Small change in their
> mind.  The best thing we did was to threaten
> prosecution, and hoped that the employee would
> resign.  There was also the employee discipline
> process for union employees.  

News flash for ya, the union doesn't like thieves.

 I am wondering if they will consider her prior criminal convictions when sentencing? They go all the way back to 2000 and incude worthless checks.

JAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  I am wondering if they will consider her prior
> criminal convictions when sentencing? They go all
> the way back to 2000 and incude worthless checks.


In the federal process, the judge receives a pre sentence report which looks at prior convictions, chances for rehab, support in the community, etc.

But, a plea deal often means a sentence range has been agreed on by prosecutor and defendant.

Posted from Android

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MEKoch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In the 70s the Federal Prosecutor would not
> touch
> > any case under $10,000.  Small change in their
> > mind.  The best thing we did was to threaten
> > prosecution, and hoped that the employee would
> > resign.  There was also the employee
> discipline
> > process for union employees.  
>
> News flash for ya, the union doesn't like thieves.

News flash fo you - unions have to defend all of their members regardless of what the charges are.