Crime | Illegal hostel hires illegal worker
In an unusual case that occurred over the weekend, the Public Security Police Force (PSP) detained a man over illegal work performed in an apartment that was serving as an illegal hostel in the ZAPE area, the PSP informed in a press conference yesterday.
The case goes back to July 5 when the PSP was performing an anti-crime operation around Rua de Pequim. The force claimed it was aware that in the nearby street (Rua de Cantão) an illegal hostel was in operation and they decided to set up a vigilance operation on the site.
When the PSP saw a man leaving the building, officers took the opportunity and approached him.
The man, a tourist from the mainland aged 52, was lodged in the alleged illegal hostel. He told the PSP that he had arrived Macau on June 27 and on that day he was approached by a woman offering cheap lodging (HKD100 per day). He claimed that the offer was initially not tempting, but the next day he found her again and asked if she still had vacancies. The woman took him to the apartment, but this time said she was charging MOP120 per day for a bed there. However, she offered him a special deal.
She said she needed to travel back to the mainland for about eight days, and proposed the man care for the apartment during this period, collecting the rental money on her behalf from people that a second woman would bring in.
In exchange for doing this, the man would get a MOP20 discount per day from his own rental fee.
He accepted the deal and paid the first three days (MOP300) in advance to the woman who then departed.
On July 4, as the first woman had informed him, a second female brought three other men to the apartment. He collected a total of HKD600 from each man for two nights’ stay.
Questioned by the police, the three men confirmed the story and the payment amounts, saying that they were approached on the street by a woman with a similar story to the one relayed by the first man.
The PSP then requested that the Macau Government Tourism Office (MGTO) send officers to the location. After inspections and hearing the stories from those involved, MGTO classified the apartment as an illegal hostel and impounded it.
As for the initial man, the police deemed that there was enough evidence to incriminate him for illegal work in the region, presenting him to the Public Prosecutions Office under such charges.
The three other hostel lodgers, all tourists from the mainland aged between 37 and 39 were let go without any charges.
Wanted robber caught by casino security
The Judiciary Police (PJ) informed that they have detained, with the help of casino security, a man who was being pursued since May 24, 2016 over a case of robbery. At the time of the initial incident, the man took the opportunity to take a bag from a Korean casino gambler from his seat on the gaming floor of a casino in Cotai. The man spotted on the surveillance cameras was being searched for until July 7 when security guards of another casino spotted and caught him, delivering the 34 year-old from the mainland to the PJ’s custody. The man confessed the crime saying that he has already spent the HKD160,000 that was in the bag. The PJ informed that the man’s detention was only possible due to the close communication between the private security forces and police authorities.
Swindle over supplier ‘fake’ email hits local shop
A swindle over an email communication from an alleged supplier of a local shop affected sales worth over MOP94,000, the Judiciary Police (PJ) informed yesterday in press conference.
The case started on July 3 when a shop that sells leather items on Rua Pedro Nolasco da Silva received an email that the shopkeeper thought was from one of her regular suppliers, an Italian company with which she claimed to have conducted business activities since 2015.
The email requested the shop update the supplier’s information, specifically bank account numbers to which she should transfer funds to pay for a recently-made order.
The woman who owns and manages the small shop did not find the email suspicious and complied with the request, changing the account information and transferring the equivalent of MOP94,279.
On the evening of July 7, she received a communication from the supplier noting that they had not yet received the payment, alerting her to check the previous email.
She then noted that the email address was slightly different from the one in use from the supplier and she suspected she had been the target of fraud.
She then decided to file a complaint to the PJ who is still investigating the case.
