Armed robbers in Pennsylvania Brinks truck heist took over $700,000: Police
Two armed males got away with between $700,000 and $800,000 in the midday Tuesday heist at an H Mart in Elkins Park, according to Cheltenham Township police.
The robbers — one described as armed with an AR-15-style pistol, the other with a handgun — fled with the cash and later abandoned their vehicle nearby, police said.
Advertisement
4 The two armed men reportedly escaped with between $700,000 and $800,000.
Cheltanham Township Police
4 One man was described to be armed with an AR-15-style pistol.
Cheltanham Township Police
No shots were fired, and no one was injured.
Advertisement
Cheltenham Township Police Lt. Andrew Snyder said it's the first such robbery in their township, but authorities are looking into whether it may be connected to four robberies of armored cars in and around Philadelphia since June that police and the FBI are investigating as possibly related.
Federal prosecutors announced Wednesday that three people from Philadelphia who were arrested in early August are charged in connection with the $2 million armed robbery of a Brink's armored vehicle outside a Home Depot on June 21.
A Loomis armored transport vehicle was held up outside an Aldi in a different neighborhood five days later. Then on July 2, a Brinks truck was held up outside a Dollar General at a shopping center.
4 Cheltenham Township Police Lt. Andrew Snyder said it's the first such robbery in their township.
Cheltanham Township Police
Advertisement
4 No shots were fired and no one was injured during the heist.
Cheltanham Township Police
And on July 15, police had a report of two suspects robbing one of the armored vehicles in northeast Philadelphia.
FBI agent Wayne Jacobs told CBS News Philadelphia that law enforcement recovered most of the money stolen in the June 21 heist, as well as a number of long weapons and handguns.
Advertisement
Some of the money had been spent on jewelry, clothes and other items, he said.
'If this is the type of activity you're going to engage in, if you look at the timeline, six weeks from the time of the incident until the time of the arrest,' Jacobs said, 'it's just a matter of time before you're held accountable for your actions.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
FBI Director Patel and foundation win defamation lawsuit against blogger, awarded $250,000
FBI Director Kash Patel and his foundation won a default judgment in their defamation lawsuit against a blogger who publicly accused Patel of being a "Kremlin asset," of trying to overthrow the U.S. government, and of planning the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Donald Trump. Patel and the Kash Foundation were awarded a total of $250,000 in compensatory and punitive damages against the Substack blogger and podcaster Jim Stewartson in an order on Aug. 5 by Judge Andrew Gordon in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas. The order was first reported by the online news site Court Watch. Gordon issued the default judgment favor of the longtime Trump loyalist Patel after Stewartson did not respond in court filings to the lawsuit, which cited a series of social media posts and other comments by Stewartson. Patel had sought $10 million in damages on claims of defamation, injurious falsehood and business disparagement. The judge said punitive damages were warranted in the case "in part to deter Stewartson and others from engaging in defamation." "Factual criticism of, and opinions about, public figures are protected speech and must be tolerated," Gordon wrote. "But defamatory falsehoods made with actual malice are not protected, even if directed at public officials. "The complaint and the motion adequately demonstrate Stewartson acted with malice." Stewartson told CNBC in a text message on Friday, "I was never served with this lawsuit. I just found out about the judgement from trolls on Twitter last week." He said that Patel's lawsuit, and another pending defamation complaint against him by former Trump national security advisor Michael Flynn in Florida state court, are "intended to intimidate me because I have been accurately and diligently reporting on Patel and Flynn's involvement in the QAnon movement and their participation on January 6th for five years." "It is a preposterous, frivolous lawsuit and neither of them will receive a dime," Stewartson said. "In fact, I intend to pursue my own case against them for their years-long campaign of abuse of me and the legal system." The FBI said that Patel would have no comment on the decision. CNBC has requested comment from his lawyers. Patel's attorneys said in a court filing in March that after filing the suit in June 2023, Stewartson for months "dodged" accepting service of the complaint, which, as a rule, is required for a civil case to proceed. The attorneys said they finally completed service of the lawsuit in late October 2023, when a person at Stewartson's home in California accepted a copy of the complaint. Gordon wrote in his order that he "found good cause to grant" a request for the default from Patel's lawyers. But Gordon also said that the motion by Patel's lawyers "offers scant evidence of harm or damages to either plaintiff." He noted that an expert's report "states that Mr. Patel's 'image has been deeply hurt by the defamation accusing him of working against the government, corruption, and crime. Apart from the business already lost, this impacts future opportunities and relationships.'" "But the report offers no examples of 'business already lost' and how Mr. Patel's image was hurt by the defamatory statements themselves, as opposed to the myriad non-defamatory attacks Mr. Patel has suffered as a result of being a public figure," Gordon wrote. "To the contrary, after the defamatory statements, Mr. Patel was confirmed by the United States Senate as Director of the F.B.I." the judge wrote. "Clearly his reputation was not significantly sullied by the defamatory statements." Gordon said there was "almost no concrete evidence of harm or damages suffered by" Patel's foundation. "All of the defamatory statements were directed at Mr. Patel individually," the judge noted. But Gordon said that both compensatory and punitive damages were warranted in the case. "Stewartson's statements were defamatory and caused presumed damages," the judge wrote. "Falsely stating as fact that a public figure 'attempted to overthrow the government,' planned the January 6 insurrection, was a 'Kremlin asset,' and paid people to 'lie to [C]ongress' ... inflicts real injuries, personally and professionally," the judge wrote. The judge awarded Patel $100,000 in compensatory damages and the same amount in punitive damages. He awarded the foundation $25,000 in compensatory damages, and the same amount in punitive damages after accepting as a reasonable estimate a claim that at least seven donors had stopped giving to the group.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal grand jury indicts New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell after long corruption probe
New Orleans Mayor Federal Charges NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A federal grand jury indicted New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell on Friday after a long corruption investigation. Cantrell's lawyer, Eddie Castaing, confirmed to The Associated Press that an indictment was returned, and her name was read aloud by a federal magistrate judge as a defendant. The charges weren't immediately known, though the FBI and U.S. attorney scheduled an afternoon news conference. The mayor's office didn't immediately respond to a phone message or email from The Associated Press seeking comment. The indictment is the culmination of a long-running federal investigation into the first female mayor in the city's 300-year history. Cantrell, who is term-limited, will leave office in January. The Democrat has clashed with City Council members during a turbulent second term and survived a recall effort in 2022. 'This is a sad day for the people of New Orleans,' said Monet Brignac, a spokesperson for City Council President JP Morrell. 'Our thoughts and prayers are with the Cantrell family as they navigate through this difficult time.' Cantrell hasn't sent out a message on her official feed on X, formerly known as Twitter, since July 15, when she said the city was experiencing historic declines in crime. As she heads into her final months in office, Cantrell has alienated former confidants and supporters, and her civic profile has receded. Her early achievements were eclipsed by self-inflicted wounds and bitter feuds with a hostile city council, political observers say. The mayor's role has weakened following voter-approved changes to the city's charter meant to curb her authority. Cantrell and her remaining allies allege that she's been unfairly targeted as Black woman and held to a different standard than male officials, her executive powers sabotaged. Earlier this year, Cantrell said she's faced 'very disrespectful, insulting, in some cases kind of unimaginable' treatment. —- Hollingsworth reported from Mission, Kansas. Solve the daily Crossword
Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
FBI Warns Scam Victims To Be On The Lookout For Fake Law Firms Offering To Help Recover Losses
Beware of fake lawyers who promise to help scam victims. getty Bad actors can take on all kinds of guises—including pretending to be lawyers. The FBI has been warning the public about a new scam involving fraudsters posing as lawyers representing fictitious law firms. With the scam showing no signs of slowing down, the FBI has updated its warning to share more details about how these fraudsters hope to steal your money—and your crypto. Scams are increasingly becoming more sophisticated and widespread. The FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) received 859,532 complaints in 2024, totaling $16.6 billion, a 33% increase from 2023—the lion's share of those complaints involved phishing and spoofing. In these common tricks, victims are tricked into providing personally identifying information or taking action. Increasingly, victims may be seeking to recover some of those losses. This is where a new scam comes in. Using social media or other messaging platforms, fraudsters may contact scam victims and offer their services, claiming to have the authority to investigate recovery cases. To verify the contact, the "lawyers" say they are working with, or have received information on, the scam victim's case from the FBI, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), or other government agency. In some cases, scam victims have reached out to fraudsters on fake websites, which look legitimate, in hopes of recovering their funds. As part of the scam, the fraudsters may request that victims verify their identities by providing personal identifying information or banking information to get their money back. They may also request that victims provide a judgment amount they are seeking from the initial fraudster or pay a portion of the initial fees up front, with the balance due when funds are recovered. Other traps may include asking victims to make payments for back taxes and other fees to recover their funds. As part of the scam, the fraudsters may reference actual financial institutions and money exchanges to build credibility and further their schemes. Between February 2023 and February 2024, cryptocurrency scam victims who were further exploited by fictitious law firms reported losses totaling over $9.9 million, according to the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3). It's important to understand that once money has left your account, it's rare that it can be recovered if you don't act quickly. Law enforcement has indicated that the money may be gone forever if a claim isn't filed within 24 hours. Claims should generally be made through law enforcement. One red flag for scams is the claim that a law firm is an officially authorized partner with multiple U.S. and foreign government or regulatory agencies. No law firms are officially authorized partners of U.S. government agencies. Sometimes, fictitious law firms will make references to fake government or regulatory entities, such as the International Financial Trading Commission (INTFTC), to add credibility to their schemes. You should always double-check to see whether such an agency exists. Scammers may also request payment in cryptocurrency or prepaid gift cards. This should set off a few alarm bells. First, most legitimate law firms offer many ways to pay—I don't know any that accept gift cards. And, the federal government does not request payment for law enforcement services provided. Scammers who already know the exact amounts and dates of previous wire transfers where scammed funds were sent should also be a red flag, as is the suggestion that you were on a government-affiliated list of scam victims, which means that you can recover their money through "legal channels." (This doesn't exist.) Scammers may also suggest that previously scammed funds are in an account held at a foreign bank, requiring you to register an account at that bank. The scammers may even provide a domain or website for the bank that appears legitimate, but is actually a fraudulent platform to continue the scheme. Similarly, scammers may attempt to place you in a group chat on WhatsApp or other messaging applications (claiming it's necessary for secrecy and safety) and suggest that they are working with foreign bank processors and attorneys and need you to pay bank fees to be used to verify your identity and ownership before they can withdraw funds. And while law firms often work on referrals, a person who has offered to work with you but is only willing to engage with one particular law firm—especially one designated as a 'crypto recovery law firm,' should raise your suspicions. Due Diligence Measures If you've been a victim of a scam, and someone outside of the government reaches out to you to help you recover funds, you should assume they should not be trusted by default—every request should be verified. You should be cautious of law firms contacting you unexpectedly, especially if you have not reported the crime to any law enforcement or civil protection agencies. If in doubt, assume it's a scam. The fictitious law firms may also target victims who were previously scammed out of crypto. Be wary of advertisements for cryptocurrency recovery services. Research the advertised company and be cautious if it uses vague language, has a minimal online presence, or makes promises about recovering funds. Before you share any information, verify the person's legitimacy. Request information about credentials, including their law license (this information can be easily verified with your state bar association). If someone who purports to be a lawyer cannot or will not provide this information, assume they are not legitimate. You should also ask for verification of employment from anyone claiming to work for the U.S. Government or law enforcement. Contact your local office of the relevant government agency and request verification of the individual's identity with whom you are communicating. And finally, keep excellent records, including recordings of video chats of all interactions. Law Enforcement Remember that law enforcement does not charge victims a fee for investigating crimes. If someone claims an affiliation with the FBI, contact your local FBI field office to confirm. Additionally, the IC3 does not work with any non-law enforcement entity, such as law firms or crypto services, to recover lost funds or investigate cases. And, the IC3 will never directly contact you for information or money. If you are approached by someone impersonating or claiming to work with IC3 or find a website impersonating the IC3, consider filing a complaint with the information. Be sure to include the website link in your complaint. Reporting A Scam If you believe you have been a victim of a cryptocurrency scheme or other fraudulent scheme, please file a report with the FBI's IC3 at If possible, include the following: Information regarding how the individual initially contacted you and how they identified themselves. Include identifying information such as name, phone number, address, email address, and username. Financial transaction information such as the date, type of payment, amount, account numbers involved (including cryptocurrency addresses), the name and address of the receiving financial institution, and the receiving cryptocurrency addresses. Additionally, the FBI requests victims of fraudulent law firm scams, or those who suspect they may have been victimized, to report the suspicious activity to their local FBI field office and the FBI's IC3. Tax Rules For Losses While you may not be able to recover your losses, taxpayers who were tricked as a result of a traditional investment scam may be entitled to tax relief. Earlier this year, the IRS Office of Chief Counsel released a memo (Memorandum Number 202511015) providing clarification on the deductibility of theft losses for scam victims. Why was clarification needed? Casualty and theft losses have a long history in our tax system. In 1867, tax deductions were allowed for losses related to fire and shipwrecks. Three years later, the same year the Harpers Ferry Flood devastated parts of the Shenandoah, the definition was expanded to include floods. A few years later, the wording was changed to "storms." By the early 20th century, the deduction had changed again. In 1913, the first tax form under the new, modern tax system allowed a general deduction for "[l]osses actually sustained during the year incurred in trade or arising from fires, storms, or shipwreck, and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise." The definition was later expanded to include "other casualty, and from theft." However, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) made another tweak: from 2018 to 2025, personal casualty and theft losses are deductible only to the extent that the losses are attributable to a federally declared disaster. (The One Big Beautiful Bill Act generally maintained the limits on losses, with one exception: it has been expanded to include state-declared disasters.) The memo stresses that the theft loss deduction is still available for businesses and individuals who incur losses in transactions entered into for profit. There is no statutory definition of "a transaction entered into for profit." However, courts have determined that to meet the criteria, a primary profit motive is required. Forbes IRS Issues Warnings On Tax Scams Driven By Bad Advice Often Found On Social Media By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes How One Small Click Led To Big Headaches For A Tax And Accounting Firm By Kelly Phillips Erb Forbes Some Scam Victims May Be Able To Deduct Related Losses On Their Tax Returns By Kelly Phillips Erb
