Former JPMorgan Chase Bank analyst guilty of stealing account holders’ personal info |

Former JPMorgan Chase Bank analyst guilty of stealing account holders’ personal info

Michael DiVittorio

An Ohio woman, a former analyst for JPMorgan Chase Bank, pleaded guilty in federal court to illegally accessing account holders’ personal information.

Sarah Wiley, 35, of Columbus plead guilty to conspiracy and aggravated identity theft charges before U.S. District Judge Nora Barry Fischer, federal authorities announced Tuesday.

She was an analyst for the multinational investment bank from September 2014 through October 2017.

Authorities said, during that time, she accessed account holders’ names and Social Security numbers without authorization.

She then shared that information with her father, Karl Edward Wiley, who was indicted last year on charges of conspiracy to produce counterfeit identification documents and checks.

Authorities said some of the counterfeit checks were cashed at the Rivers Casino in Pittsburgh. Karl Wiley is awaiting trial.

Judge Fischer scheduled Sarah Wiley’s sentencing for July 25. She faces up to seven years in prison and a $500,000 fine.

Homeland Security Investigations in Harrisburg and the Pennsylvania State Police conducted the investigation that led to the prosecution of Sarah Wiley.

Michael DiVittorio is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Michael at 412-871-2367, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Regional
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.