This catalog-style study investigates the rhetorical framing surrounding fraud as a form of legitimate retribution for colonial injustice. The analysis situates online romance fraud and related encounters with law enforcement within a wider discourse of grievance and historical accountability. Drawing on interviews with individuals involved in fraud and with police personnel, the work traces how narratives of colonial harm are mobilized to justify illicit acts and to reinterpret personal responsibility. The account treats fraud not only as technique but as a communicative act embedded in broader cultural scripts about justice, injury, and restitution, examined through the lens of deviant behavior theory. A core focus is the application of neutralization techniques—patterns of rationalization and escalation that allow individuals to deflect blame and frame harm as remedial rather than criminal. The study identifies recurrent moves such as appeals to higher loyalties, denial of injury, and claims of moral imperative, and considers how these articulations surface in police interviews and in the online presentation of schemes. The analysis evaluates how such rationalizations interact with perceptions of colonial history and with policing practices, shaping both offender self-conception and investigative responses. Findings are presented in a neutral, catalog-like manner, emphasizing conceptual themes rather than prescriptive conclusions. The work speaks to debates in criminology about the ways grievance narratives intersect with deviant behavior, the functions of justification in criminal activity, and the role of interview discourse in shaping understanding of fraud. It offers a reference for scholars and practitioners seeking to parse how legitimate-retribution frames emerge in cases linking colonial injustice to contemporary fraud.