In article >,
"Paul M. Cook" > wrote:

> > http://www.windsorstar.com/Leamingto...799/story.html
>
> Wow, talk about a sucker. I guess it never occurred to him that if they
> were holding 12.6 million in cash that they could pay the fees themselves
> and give him the balance. But then he doesn't exactly sound like the
> sharpest bulb in the drawer.

I read a book on cons once. It was pretty interesting. One common
theme in many cons, is that the first step is to convince the sucker
that *they* are actually the one doing the con. Despite what the above
reference says, I'm willing to bet (zero money) that the initial letter
was vague enough, that the sucker knew that he had no claim whatsoever
on that money, but that the letter already admitted that all that was
known was the last name, which *just happened* to match. So he's not
going to share much information with his relatives, because he knows
darn well that they have just as much a claim to the money as him. He's
going to play it close to his chest.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel > wrote:

>I read a book on cons once. It was pretty interesting. One common
>theme in many cons, is that the first step is to convince the sucker
>that *they* are actually the one doing the con.

Good point. People who invested in Madoff felt they had
pulled one off because they assumed Madoff was front-running
or similar, cheating the markets based on his insider status,
and they felt good about that. Little did they know he
wasn't cheating anyone except them.

Very similar to the Nigerian scam in that respect.

Steve