FirstAlerts

Nigerian National Pleads Guilty in Cross-Country Unemployment Insurance Fraud Scheme

Akinpelumi Olawale Oyewusi, 60, of Hyattsville, Maryland, pleaded guilty to wire fraud conspiracy and aggravated identity theft in connection with a scheme that defrauded state workforce agencies.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 2:22 p.m. ET
A Nigerian national guilty in federal court on August 20, 2026, to charges stemming from his involvement in a cross-country unemployment insurance (UI) fraud scheme, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland. Akinpelumi Olawale Oyewusi, 60, of Hyattsville, Maryland, is charged with wire fraud conspiracy and aggravated identity theft. According to his guilty plea, from September 2020 through at least March 2021, Oyewusi and others conspired to defraud state workforce authorities, including the Maryland Department of Labor, by using the identities of real people to obtain fraudulent UI funds. He then transferred and withdrew the stolen funds through electronic transfers and ATM withdrawals. Oyewusi was directly connected to at least $415,874.63 in actual losses and personally obtained at least $25,000 through the scheme. Between December 2020 and March 2021, at least 18 ATM photos captured him withdrawing $18,000 from UI debit cards issued to six different fraudulent claims. Bank records indicate he withdrew approximately $69,000 from the same cards throughout the scheme. Sentencing is set for Thursday, December 3, at 2 p.m. The prosecution is part of the Trump Administration's Task Force to Eliminate Fraud. U.S. Attorney Kelly O. Hayes announced the guilty plea with Inspector General Joseph V. Cuffari of DHS-OIG and Inspector General Anthony P. D'Esposito of DOL-OIG.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 18:22current

    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.