context: . Defendants' claims that they were stupid or duped are not new to this court.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 952 F.2d 1251, 1251
citation_a.parenthetical: stating defendant "not the unwilling dupe he would have us believe"
citation_a.sentence: See also Dozal-Bencomo, 952 F.2d at 1251 (stating defendant "not the unwilling dupe he would have us believe”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 980 F.2d 1074, 1085-86
citation_b.parenthetical: finding no impropriety in prosecutor's statement that defendants tried to "dupe" hospital staff
citation_b.sentence: See, e.g., United States v. Neely, 980 F.2d 1074, 1085-86 (7th Cir.1992) (finding no impropriety in prosecutor's statement that defendants tried to "dupe” hospital staff); United States v. Johnson, 927 F.2d 999, 1004-05 (7th Cir.1991) (rejecting defendant’s claim that she was too unsophisticated to have requisite intent to defraud government); United States v. George, 869 F.2d 333, 334 (7th Cir.1989) (noting defendant's claim at sentencing hearing that court consider defendant's totally unsophisticated behavior).