Flagstaff Woman Accused of Collecting Benefits In AZ, Canada

Elizabeth Anne Trushel

The State Grand Jury indicted Elizabeth Anne Trushel on charges related to welfare fraud. Trushel is accused of stealing more than $9,000 in benefits from the State of Arizona, using her dual citizenship to receive public benefits from both the United States and Canada.

Trushel allegedly received $9,367.95 in benefits from the State of Arizona and during this same time she received $18,841.12 in benefits from Canada.

The Arizona Department of Economic Security and the Canadian Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation investigated this case.

The State Grand Jury indicted Trushel on the following charges:

•Two counts of Fraudulent Schemes and Artifices, class 2 felonies
•Theft, a class 3 felony
•Forgery, a class 4 felony
•Taking the Identity of Another Person or Entity, a class 4 felony
•Two counts of Fraudulent Schemes and Practices, class 5 felonies
•Unlawful Use of Food Stamps, a class 6 felony
•Application Fraud, a class 6 felony
•Theft, a class 6 felony

In July 2013, Trushel moved from the Canadian Province of British Columbia to Flagstaff, AZ. Shortly after moving to Flagstaff, Trushel began receiving nutritional assistance (food stamps) through the Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES) and Medicaid coverage through the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS). Trushel is accused of providing false documents to DES showing that the Canadian Government had discontinued giving her any form of public assistance. Meanwhile, Trushel allegedly received public assistance from both the Canadian Government and the State of Arizona. The programs administered by DES and AHCCCS do not allow an individual to receive simultaneous benefits from another jurisdiction.

All defendants are presumed innocent until convicted in a court of law.

1 Comment

  1. <Sadly, the article fails to
    mention the time interval of
    the alleged criminal activity.

    Did she continue to receive benefits
    from only one entity at some point, and
    that is not part of the allegations?

    Was the identity theft scenario continuing
    beyond the period of dual benefits, or only
    for that discrete time period?

    Kudos go to the government employee(s)
    who uncovered this alleged subterfuge.
    [since we are always at the ready to call
    government workers “slackers.”]

Comments are closed.