[ml/nj]

In this case, who (other than the perpetrators) acted to his or her detriment?

I suppose you might make the same argument about the Mueller investigation; or like Hillary ask, "What difference does it make/"

The Chicago Police spent resources investigating the "attack" that they otherwise would not have spent.

The intent was to get the government to act to MY detriment, and maybe get some "brothers" to play the knock-out game.

ML/NJ

[Alberta's Child]

I suppose you might make the same argument about the Mueller investigation; or like Hillary ask, "What difference does it make?"

No, I wouldn't. Look closely at Mueller's prosecutions. They allege actual fraud on the part of various defendants (Manafort, for example).

Notice that he never charged Mike Flynn with fraud for lying to the FBI.

I hope Juicy Smellitt goes to prison for ten years. Prosecuting him for a crime that doesn't hold up under any legal scrutiny does nothing to make that happen.

[Alberta's Child]

The Chicago Police spent resources investigating the "attack" that they otherwise would not have spent.

That's not fraud ... because Smellitt didn't put any of that money in his pocket. And those police would have been paid anyway.

If he had staged a fake hate crime and then claimed reward money for turning in another perp, on the other hand, then fraud would absolutely be a legitimate charge.