ShareThis Page

More ID theft charges filed

| Monday, Nov. 3, 2003

MONESSEN - Monessen police today filed additional charges against a Charleroi man who allegedly stole the identity of his former brother-in-law.

Mike Gaydos, 25, of 712 Meadow Ave., was charged with two additional counts of identity theft, forgery and access device fraud, and two counts of theft and receiving stolen property.

On Oct. 24, Gaydos was charged with identity theft, forgery and access device fraud after he confessed to obtaining personal information about Doug Campbell, of Monessen, including his Social Security number, and obtaining a Discover Card account in Campbell's name.

Gaydos registered the card for his own address, but in Campbell's name, police said. From June through August, he purportedly ran up $4,900 in charges on the account.

As a result of that incident, Campbell ran a credit history on himself and discovered two more credit card accounts in his name but for Gaydos' address.

One of the accounts, with Capital One, carried $5,053 in charges. The other, with Bank of America, carried $3,821 in charges.

Monessen Det. Sgt. John Mandarino said Campbell called him Friday and reported the other accounts.

Mandarino filed the charges and then went to Monessen District Justice Joseph Dalfonso this morning to obtain a warrant for Gaydos' arrest.

"These new credit card charges are the same as the other one," Mandarino said.

"The cards were in Doug's name but were sent to Gaydos' home.

"When (Gaydos) confessed after the first charge, he told me there weren't any more."

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.

click me