Skip to content
The allegations against Henry Yau, a former Supervisory Deportation Officer with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), shed light on a troubling pattern of corruption within the agency, highlighting vulnerabilities in its structure and oversight. Yau’s case illustrates how individuals in positions of authority can exploit their access to sensitive information for personal gain. The misuse of government databases to disclose confidential information, particularly when motivated by financial or personal incentives, strikes at the core of ICE’s mission to uphold national security and public safety.
The Investigation Reveals The Corruption
The investigation into Tommy Lin and Henry Yau revealed a web of corruption and fraudulent activity that exploited their positions of trust and access. Tommy Lin, a former Director in the New York City Mayor’s Office and later a Senior Advisor to the NYPD’s Asian Advisory Council, leveraged his connections to law enforcement and government resources to further a multimillion-dollar bank fraud scheme. Henry Yau, a Supervisory Deportation Officer with ICE, played a pivotal role in facilitating Lin’s activities by misusing sensitive immigration and law enforcement data.
The investigation revealed a troubling misuse of ICE’s sensitive databases by Yau. As a Deportation Officer, Yau accessed confidential information to identify and target individuals for arrest, including for personal and financial gain. Yau’s actions were instrumental in enabling Lin’s ability to leverage immigration enforcement as a tool to intimidate or silence individuals.
The case highlights the collaborative efforts of federal agencies, including the FBI, the New York City Department of Investigation, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General. Their investigation uncovered text messages, database access logs, and evidence of financial exchanges that exposed the corrupt activities of Lin and Yau. The indictments against both individuals underscore the seriousness of their misconduct and serve as a reminder of the importance of accountability and oversight in positions of authority. These investigations not only address individual wrongdoings but also aim to deter similar abuses of power in the future.
Who Are Henry Yau And Tommy Lin?
Tommy Lin and Henry Yau, two central figures in related corruption and fraud investigations, represent a troubling convergence of political influence and law enforcement power misused for personal gain. Their professional paths and criminal activities, as outlined in recent cases, reveal a shared willingness to exploit their positions for unlawful purposes, leading to significant financial and reputational harm.
Former Director Of Constituent Services
Tommy Lin was a former Director of Constituent Services in the New York City Mayor’s Office under Bill de Blasio’s administration and later served as the Queens Community Coordinator for the New York City Department of Environmental Protection. Known for his political savvy, Lin played a prominent role in Asian community outreach and served as a Senior Advisor to the NYPD’s Asian Advisory Council. While highly regarded within his community, Lin’s career took a dark turn when he became involved in a multimillion-dollar bank fraud scheme.
Tommy Defrauded Financial Institutions
Lin allegedly helped defraud financial institutions by organizing unauthorized fund transfers and leveraging his law enforcement connections to conduct background checks on co-conspirators. Perhaps most egregiously, he accepted a $20,000 bribe to orchestrate the arrest and deportation of a disgruntled scheme participant through his connection with Henry Yau.
Henry Used His Position To Give Out Personal Information
Henry Yau, on the other hand, was a Supervisory Deportation Officer with ICE, entrusted with access to sensitive databases containing personal and immigration-related information. Yau used his position to share confidential information with unauthorized parties, including Lin, for personal and financial gain. His actions facilitated Lin’s efforts to use immigration law enforcement as a tool to further the fraud conspiracy, including targeting individuals for arrest based on their immigration status.
The relationship between Lin and Yau was instrumental in their ability to carry out these schemes. Yau’s misuse of ICE’s resources enabled Lin to exploit immigration enforcement for private vendettas and financial benefits. This partnership exemplifies a deeply concerning dynamic where the confluence of political influence and law enforcement power becomes a vehicle for corruption. Their case underscores the need for stronger oversight and accountability measures to prevent such abuses of authority in the future.
How They Stole Money From the Banks
Tommy Lin and his co-conspirators orchestrated a sophisticated scheme to defraud financial institutions, resulting in losses exceeding $10 million. Their operation relied on a combination of fraudulent tactics and systematic manipulation of banking processes. The conspiracy involved transferring funds between accounts under their control and then falsely reporting these transfers as unauthorized, prompting the banks to refund the amounts.
Manipulated The Fraud Detection System
The scheme specifically targeted a dozen financial institutions and cleverly exploited procedural vulnerabilities in how banks handle disputed transactions. Consequently, by claiming the transfers were fraudulent, Lin and his associates successfully manipulated the banks’ fraud detection systems, which led the institutions to reverse the transactions and credit the affected accounts. Furthermore, once the refunds were issued, the conspirators swiftly withdrew the funds in cash or converted them to cryptocurrency, thereby making it extremely difficult for the banks to recover the money.
The Use of Illegal Immigrants
A critical component of this scheme was the use of temporary immigrants from China or Taiwan as account holders. These individuals, often unaware of the full extent of the fraud, were recruited to open accounts that were later controlled by the conspirators. This method provided an additional layer of insulation for Lin and his co-conspirators, making it harder for law enforcement to trace the fraud directly back to them.
Lin’s role extended beyond logistical support; he leveraged his connections in law enforcement to ensure the scheme’s success. He conducted background checks on the co-conspirators to confirm they were not under investigation and provided the names and birth dates of potential account holders. Additionally, when a disgruntled participant threatened to expose the scheme, Lin paid a $20,000 bribe to Henry Yau, an ICE Deportation Officer, to have the individual arrested and deported, further silencing potential whistleblowers.
How the Information Was Misused
The misuse of information from ICE databases by Henry Yau in collaboration with Tommy Lin illustrates a gross abuse of access to sensitive government records. Yau, a Supervisory Deportation Officer, exploited his position to access immigration and law enforcement databases containing confidential information. This information was then shared with unauthorized individuals, including Lin, and used in ways that directly violated federal laws and ethical standards.
Used To Intimidate Participants
One of the most egregious examples of this misuse involved Lin’s fraudulent scheme to intimidate a disgruntled participant in a bank fraud operation. Lin, facing potential exposure from this individual, sought Yau’s assistance to have the person arrested and deported. Using his access to ICE systems, Yau retrieved detailed personal information, including immigration status and criminal history, which was crucial to orchestrating the arrest. Yau’s actions went beyond merely supplying information; he actively facilitated the arrest by preparing official documentation and directly intervening in immigration enforcement processes. This misuse of ICE resources not only silenced the participant but also protected Lin’s ongoing criminal activities.
Ran Background Checks
Additionally, Yau routinely accessed ICE and other government databases to run background checks for Lin and his associates. Yau conducted these checks to confirm that law enforcement was not investigating members of Lin’s fraud scheme, thereby reducing the risk of detection. Additionally, Yau provided Lin with non-public information about specific individuals, enabling Lin to manipulate or target them for personal or financial gain. For example, Yau accessed border-crossing histories, immigration statuses, and application records to assist Lin in various illicit endeavors.
This misuse of ICE databases highlights significant vulnerabilities in how sensitive government information is accessed and monitored. Yau’s ability to retrieve and disseminate such information underscores the need for stricter oversight and auditing mechanisms within agencies like ICE. The actions of Yau and Lin reveal how breaches of trust at this level can have far-reaching consequences, compromising individual privacy, enabling corruption, and undermining the integrity of federal enforcement agencies. This case serves as a cautionary tale about the potential for abuse when access to sensitive information is not tightly controlled.
The Charges They Both Face
Henry Yau and Tommy Lin face serious federal charges that reflect the gravity of their alleged misconduct. Both men are accused of exploiting their professional positions to further criminal activities, undermining the institutions they served. Their cases are distinct but interconnected, as Lin’s use of Yau’s law enforcement access underscores the breadth of their coordinated corruption.
Henry Yau Face Identity Theft
Henry Yau is charged with multiple violations, including identity theft conspiracy, conversion of government records, and unauthorized disclosure of individually identifiable information. These charges stem from Yau’s misuse of ICE databases to access and disseminate confidential information for personal gain. The charges also encompass his involvement in sharing sensitive immigration and law enforcement data with individuals like Lin and other co-conspirators.
Yau’s actions facilitated arrests, deportations, and the targeting of individuals based on personal vendettas or financial incentives. If convicted, Yau faces potentially severe penalties, including significant prison time, as these offenses carry maximum sentences of up to 10 years each, depending on the specific charges.
Tommy Lin Faces Fraud
Tommy Lin, on the other hand, is charged with bank fraud conspiracy, conspiracy to commit wire fraud affecting financial institutions, and aggravated identity theft. The bank fraud conspiracy and wire fraud charges each carry a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison, reflecting the substantial harm caused to financial institutions, which lost over $10 million.
The identity theft charge, tied to Lin’s use of immigrant identities to open fraudulent accounts, includes a mandatory consecutive sentence of two years. Lin’s charges also highlight his role in leveraging law enforcement connections to further the scheme, such as arranging for Yau to arrest a disgruntled participant in exchange for a $20,000 bribe.
Need Help? Call Us Now!
Do not forget that when you or anyone you know is facing a criminal charge, you have us, the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, by your side to help you build the best defense case for you. We will work and be in your best interest for you and we will obtain the best possible outcome that can benefit you.
Our team is here to explain your trial, guiding you through the criminal justice process with clarity and support every step of the way. If you’re navigating the complexities of criminal charges and the court system seems daunting, reach out.
Therefore, do not hesitate to call us if you find yourself or someone you know that is facing criminal charges unsure about the court system. We will work with you to give you the best type of defense that can help you solve your case. It is vital to have someone explain the result of the charge to you and guide you in the best possible way.
Here at the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, our professional and knowledgeable criminal law attorneys build a defense case that suits your needs, aiming for the best possible outcome to benefit you.
At the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, we offer a free consultation at your convenience. You can schedule your appointment via Zoom, Google Meet, email, or in person. We provide comprehensive advice and information to help you achieve the best possible result in your case.
Call us now at (281) 810-9760.
Other Related Articles
What Are the Divorce Rights of a Cheating Spouse in Texas?
Can I Dictate Child Support Spending in Texas? A Complete Guide
How Long Does a Protective Order Last in Texas?
The Spotlight Is On The Arrest Of Thomas Manzo
Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Filing for Divorce
FAQs on Henry Yau and Tommy Lin Case
Henry Yau was a Supervisory Deportation Officer with ICE, while Tommy Lin was a former Director in the New York City Mayor’s Office. Both individuals were involved in schemes involving fraud and misuse of government resources, with Yau leveraging his ICE access to assist Lin’s criminal activities.
Henry Yau accessed ICE databases to retrieve sensitive immigration and personal information, which he shared with unauthorized individuals like Tommy Lin. This information was used to target individuals for deportation and further fraud schemes.
The bank fraud scheme involved transferring money between controlled accounts and falsely reporting these transfers as unauthorized. This induced financial institutions to refund over $10 million, which was quickly withdrawn or converted to cryptocurrency by the conspirators.
Henry Yau faces charges including identity theft conspiracy and unauthorized disclosure of government records, while Tommy Lin faces charges of bank fraud conspiracy, wire fraud, and aggravated identity theft. These charges carry potential sentences of decades in prison.
This case highlights the critical need for oversight and accountability in roles of public trust. It demonstrates how systemic vulnerabilities in government and financial systems can be exploited when safeguards are inadequate.
