.
Feedback

Danbury Ponzi Scheme Sends New Fairfield Man To Prison

The following press release came from the office of U.S. Attorney David Fein.

Stephen B. Blankenship, 64, of New Fairfield, was sentenced yesterday by United States District Judge Vanessa L. Bryant in Hartford to 41 months of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release.

Fein said Blankenship defrauded investors of approximately $600,000 in a long-running Ponzi scheme.  Blankenship was also ordered to pay a $7,500 fine. Judge Bryant will issue a restitution order after further court proceedings.

“Over the course of a decade, this defendant convinced investors that their retirement funds were safe and growing at the same time he was using their money to pay business and personal expenses, and to pay other investors as part of a Ponzi scheme,” stated U.S. Attorney David B. Fein.  “In order to protect the investing public, the Department of Justice and our law enforcement partners are committed to uncovering these schemes and prosecuting the fraudsters who perpetrate them."

Fein said this case was seamlessly investigated by the Danbury Police Department, the FBI, SEC, and Connecticut’s Department of Banking.

"I commend them for their collective efforts in bringing this unscrupulous investment advisor to justice,” Fein said.

According to court documents and statements made in court, Blankenship owned and operated Deer Hill Financial Group, LLC, in Danbury, which he represented to be an investment management firm in the business of managing client funds and buying and selling securities on behalf of clients. However, at no time was Deer Hill Financial Group registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) as an investment company, investment adviser, broker-dealer, or in any other capacity.

From approximately 2002 to March 2012, Blankenship falsely represented to numerous individuals that he had investment opportunities that were safe and would pay a consistent return to investors. Blankenship had been affiliated with registered broker-dealers in California and New York, and many of his victims were his prior customers.

Blankenship's false representations to his victims included that Deer Hill was being operated as a legitimate investment management firm, that investors could obtain a greater rate of return by withdrawing money from their existing brokerage accounts and investing directly with him, and that funds would be invested in publicly-traded mutual funds or established securities.  In fact, there were no actual investments or investment opportunities, the money was not invested in publicly traded mutual funds, nor was it invested in established securities.

Blankenship failed to invest the money as represented and instead used the victims’ funds to pay business expenses and personal expenses for travel, grocery shopping, credit card payments, mortgage payments, and improvements on his home.

In order to create the appearance of legitimacy, Blankenship sent investors fraudulent account statements reflecting fictitious holdings, fictitious transactions, fictitious prices for the securities, and phony balances, all of which were intended to convince investors that their money was secure and appreciating.

Blankenship also falsely represented to his victims that he could achieve – and was achieving – a consistent and positive return on the invested funds when, in fact, he was not achieving such returns.  He also used a portion of the victim-investors’ funds to make fraudulent lulling payments to other victim-investors to create the appearance that there were actual investment returns.

Through this scheme, Blankenship defrauded at least eight investors of approximately $600,000.

In a parallel action, the SEC has filed a complaint alleging that Blankenship and Deer Hill violated the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws and acted as unregistered brokers.  The complaint seeks disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest, monetary penalties, and the entry of a permanent injunction against Blankenship.

On September 12, 2012, Blankenship pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud and one count of securities fraud.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Brookfield Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Olga Konyukhova May 20, 2013 at 01:03 pm
Thank you, I will! We all miss him and hope he'll find his way home.
Jaimie Cura (Editor) May 20, 2013 at 11:28 am
Sending all the best vibes your way. I shared your post on Facebook and Twitter. Keep us posted,Read More Olga!
BuckWheat May 19, 2013 at 04:28 pm
Oh dont you worry, were gonna vote, but not going to vote to increase taxes thats for sure. Do withRead More what you have.
Steven DeVaux May 19, 2013 at 08:16 am
I would recommend supporting an increase similar to Ridgefield's which was under 2% (1.97%). If aRead More community like Ridgefield can perform at high levels with an increase under 2%, the Board of Education, in asking for almost twice that is openly admitting that they have installed inefficient management in school administration. Further, the sewer system on the referendum will require municipal funding since it is backed by the full faith and credit of the town of Brookfield and reduces the town's borrowing ability - the advertisement for which indicated it would not impact municipal funding.
Steven DeVaux May 19, 2013 at 06:52 am
So Mandarin Chinese won't be a requirement? Perhaps Manchurin Chinese? Cantonese Chinese? MongolianRead More Chinese? Which Chinese are the British speaking these days? Their empire stretched in the Hindu speaking parts of Asia but they aren't teaching Hindu. A quandry indeed.
Steven DeVaux May 17, 2013 at 05:23 pm
The board of education's policy should pertain to all employees of the Brookfield Board ofRead More Education.
Steven DeVaux May 17, 2013 at 05:22 pm
The short answer is because they want to. If you spent twice at much they still would. EducationRead More personnel need to be monitored on social media like Patch.
Laura Orban May 17, 2013 at 12:18 pm
I will lend a hand by voting yes for the school budget this Tuesday, May 21st. Teachers should notRead More have to pay out of pocket for school supplies.
Steven DeVaux May 18, 2013 at 11:58 am
Interesting that representative Scribner fails to represent Brookfield's businesses choosing insteadRead More to focus on Ridgefields.