FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Georgia Sisters Plead Guilty in $2M Pandemic Benefits Fraud Scheme

Two Georgia sisters admitted to conspiring to defraud Ohio's unemployment insurance program, causing more than $2 million in losses.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 3, 2026, 10:41 a.m. ET
Two Georgia sisters guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud for their roles in a scheme that caused more than $2 million in pandemic unemployment benefits to be paid on fraudulent claims, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Ohio. Joirean Creel, 35, of Duluth, and Adriane Creel, 24, of Stone Mountain, entered their pleas before U.S. Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg on Aug. 31, the office said in a Sept. 3 announcement. The sisters worked as remote teleservices representatives through a subcontractor for the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS), which administered federally funded unemployment benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to court documents, the defendants abused their system access to solicit and accept bribes and kickbacks, nullifying and voiding claims that had been flagged as suspected fraud. They also fraudulently obtained additional benefits for themselves by submitting applications in their own names to other states, including New York, Pennsylvania, and Nevada. Investigators also found that Joirean Creel was employed by the U.S. Postal Service while claiming to be unemployed. Law enforcement seized and forfeited a Mercedes Benz GL450. The investigation was led by the U.S. Department of Labor-Office of Inspector General, the FBI Cleveland Division, and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service Pittsburgh Division-Cleveland Field Office. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Elliot Morrison and Erica Barnhill are prosecuting the case.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 13 Sept 2026, 14:41current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.