Skip to main content

Richard Lynn Barnaby Sentenced for Selling Fake Stock

MINNEAPOLIS—B. Todd Jones, United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota, announced that a 59-year-old Vadnais Heights man was sentenced in federal court earlier today for bilking an investor out of more than $168,000 by selling him fictitious stock. U.S. District Court Judge James M. Rosenbaum specifically sentenced Richard Lynn Barnaby to 27 months in prison on one count of investment fraud through interstate wire. Barnaby, who was charged on October 13, 2009, and pled guilty on November 17, 2009, was also ordered to pay $222,639.26 in restitution to seven victims.

In his plea agreement, Barnaby admitted that between 2003 and May of 2005, he operated a scheme through which he sold nonexisting stock in Teledigital, Inc., an actual company that marketed pre-paid cell phone software services and equipment. To carry out the scheme, Barnaby, who served as the company’s president from July of 2002 through September of 2004, told a potential investor he was the agent for some people who wanted to sell their Teledigital stock. As a result of that representation, Barnaby actually sold the investor approximately 1,400 shares of capital stock in Teledigital between November of 2003 and October of 2005 for an aggregate price of $168,402.26. However, instead of purchasing the shares of stock as promised, Barnaby kept the $168,402.26 for his own personal use.

In furtherance of the scheme, on May 25, 2005, Barnaby used the e-mail account of an acquaintance to forward to the victim an e-mail purportedly from an official at Wells Fargo Bank, stating it could not “clear” the Teledigital capital stock until the company became “whole” with the bank. Barnaby admitted he led the victim to believe the stock existed and was in the hands of Wells Fargo Bank.

This case was the result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney David J. MacLaughlin.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...