You're moving the goalposts. You said you saw no difference between what he said and what victim of a scammer would. You've inferred from the article what you imagine he said. The article has the 20 years bit, and yes, we have no evidence he told the bank, but neither do we have evidence he didn't, and your only basis for assuming one and not the other is your own biases.
It's fair to question whether he gave them that info, but not for just assuming he didn't.
> MacInnes’s “crime” was to try to send money to a friend he and his wife have known for more than 20 years