Score:   1
Docket Number:   ED-PA  5:20-cr-00248
Case Name:   USA v. WEIGAND
  Press Releases:
PHILADELPHIA – United States Attorney William M. McSwain announced that Jason C. Weigand, 50, of Denver, PA has been charged by Indictment with mail fraud, wire fraud, and interstate transportation of stolen securities, while on bail for separate, similar offenses.

The Indictment announced today alleges that Weigand helped a former client of his, identified in court documents as “AH,” recover on life insurance policies when her husband died. Weigand later convinced AH to provide him with at least $239,000, which he told her that he would invest on her behalf. However, according to the Indictment, Weigand did not invest the client’s money in appropriate investments as he promised, but instead used the money for his own personal and business purposes, including payments to his personal line of credit, his Visa credit card, and his Lincoln MKZ and Chevy Suburban car loans.

In October 2017, Weigand was charged in a separate federal Indictment with allegedly misusing funds belonging to his clients. He was arrested on those charges and released subject to conditions including that he not commit any “Federal, State, or local crime during the period of release.” He allegedly violated those conditions by committing some of the offenses alleged in the current Indictment. Further, during the relevant time period, Weigand did not even possess a license to act as an investment advisor.

According to the Indictment, Weigand was a registered investment advisor in Pennsylvania between 2009 and 2014, and in New Jersey between 2011 and 2014. He voluntarily surrendered his licenses as an investment advisor in both states in 2014. In the case of his Pennsylvania license, Weigand terminated it on April 10, 2014—the same day that he was questioned by investigators from the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities about his investment advisor activities.

“Weigand is alleged to be a serial fraudster with no respect for the law,” said U.S. Attorney McSwain. “Rather than serving his clients, he served himself. Prosecuting financial and securities fraud -- and thereby safeguarding innocent investors -- has been and will continue to be a top priority of my Office.”  

“Jason Weigand was first arrested in 2017 by Postal Inspectors from the Philadelphia Division for stealing money from his investment advisory clients,” said Postal Inspector in Charge, Damon Wood. “Since 2017, while preparing to defend himself on those charges, Mr. Weigand went back to his old ways, stealing money from his investment clients. I applaud the diligence of the investigators and prosecutors in this case to not only prepare for trial but to follow up on allegations of new crimes. The Postal Inspection Service has long prided itself as being a leader in investigating investments frauds. From snake oil salesmen in the 19th century to modern day Wall Street frauds, if the United States Mail is used, Postal Inspectors will work tirelessly to bring the perpetrators to justice.”

If convicted, the defendant faces a maximum possible sentence of 120 years imprisonment, $1,500,000 fine, 3 years supervised release, $600 special assessment.

The case was investigated by the United States Postal Inspection Service, and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Katherine Driscoll and Paul Shapiro.

An indictment, information, or criminal complaint is an accusation. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

PHILADELPHIA – An indictment, unsealed today, charges Jason C. Weigand, 47, of Denver, PA, in a scheme to defraud clients of his financial advising businesses, Nations First Financial Group (“Nations First”) and First Financial Princeton LLC (“First Princeton”), announced Acting United States Attorney Louis D. Lappen.  Weigand is charged with (i) three counts of bank fraud; (ii) four counts of wire fraud; (iii) two counts of mail fraud; (iv) three counts of aggravated identity theft; (v) four counts of accessing a protected computer without authorization; and (vi) four counts of money laundering.  According to the indictment, as a result of the alleged scheme, Weigand’s clients lost more than $290,000.

 

According to the indictment, Weigand was a registered investment advisor in Pennsylvania between 2009 and 2014 and in New Jersey between 2011 and 2014.  During this period, Weigand held himself to clients as a knowledgeable and reputable source of investment advice, recommending investments in both securities and insurance products.  However, notwithstanding his obligation to act primarily for the benefit of his clients and to observe high standards of commercial honor, the indictment alleges that he diverted the funds of his clients, using it for personal, business, and other purposes unrelated to the investment objective of those clients. 

 

According to the indictment, AR met Weigand when he became the homeowners’ insurance agent for AR and her husband.  In April, 2005, Weigand attended AR’s husband’s funeral and, around that time, suggested that he become AR’s investment advisor.  Feeling vulnerable, AR agreed. She directed Weigand to keep her money safe for retirement and not to invest it in any high risk assets.  Instead, however, Weigand used $60,000 of AR’s money to fund accounts in the name of another client and then Weigand withdrew that money for his own personal and business purposes.  Further, according to the indictment, Weigand used forged documents to open a different account in AR’s name at a brokerage, and induced AR to fund that account with almost $200,000 of her own funds.  Unbeknownst to AR, that account had check writing privileges, which Weigand used to write checks of at least $98,000 for his own benefit. 

 

Later, according to the indictment, AR started to become suspicious of Weigand’s management of her funds.  In an effort to cover up his own misconduct, the indictment alleges that Weigand hacked into AR’s email, used forged documents to open an account in AR’s name at another brokerage, and funded that account with money stolen from other clients.  Weigand then impersonated that client in telephone calls and emails with that brokerage. 

 

If convicted, Weigand faces a maximum statutory sentence of more than 20 years in prison, possible fines, a minimum sentence of 2 years, and up to three years of supervised release. Weigand would be required to pay a $2,000 special assessment.  A notice of forfeiture for $290,000 is also attached.

 

The case was investigated by the United States Postal Inspection Service, the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities, and the Pennsylvania Insurance Department, Enforcement Division and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Paul Shapiro.

                                                                             

An Indictment is an accusation.  A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dpCEp1YJVg0kkEh8aVyiDEtw7yjHGfkEG42VEkPeEQE
  Last Updated: 2025-03-28 18:40:09 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fourth highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the fifth highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E