The case against a Utah man accused of posing as a wealthy businessman and swindling victims out of more than $1 million took a new turn Friday when the judge didn't go along with a plea deal between the prosecution and defense.
In another twist, the attorney for Farzad “Frankie” Fard withdrew from the case after Third District Judge Robin Reese announced he would use his own discretion in sentencing the alleged con-man. Defense Attorney Randall Spencer cited the expense should his client withdraw his guilty plea and the case goes to trial, noting that Fard owes him money now.
Fard, 50, of Bluffdale, faces multiple counts of communication fraud and other charges stemming from his alleged schemes, which authorities say ranged from bogus real estate deals to shady diamond investments.
During Friday’s hearing in Salt Lake City, tearful victims spoke of the financial and emotional damage they say Fard inflicted on them.
“I was pretty much in the depths of despair,” said Sharon Christensen, who met Fard in 2006 while working as a property manager and said she was forced into bankruptcy because of his scams. Christensen recounted the embarrassment and ridicule she and her son suffered as she went $188,000 into debt and her house was foreclosed on.
“It was complete and total humiliation,” she said.
Described by another victim as “confident, gregarious, happy and charming,” investigators say one way Fard lured potential marks was to claim he was the heir to a multi-million dollar trust that his father built under the Shah of Iran. With this guise of wealth, Fard would gain their confidence and suggest they invest with his company, FAS Group LLC of Lehi.
Fard used his investor’s money for his own expenses, according to a probable cause statement. Investigators say Fard sometimes was able to gain control of his victim’s credit cards and bank accounts, racking up thousands of dollars in debt. In a technique similar to a Ponzi scheme, Fard also allegedly used funds provided by one investor to make small payments to others, passing it off as a return on investment
During the hearing, Fard apologized to his victims and said he plans to work “diligently” to pay back the money he took.
Last October Fard agreed to plead guilty to six felony charges as part of a plea deal, according to court documents. The prosecution agreed to dismiss seven other charges and not to file two additional counts, instead including those in a restitution figure of more than $1 million that Fard agreed to pay back to the victims. The state recommended one year in jail, with credit for time Fard has already served, and allowing it to run concurrently with Fard’s convictions in other jurisdictions.
Sympathizing with the victims, Judge Reese noted the havoc Fard caused before announcing his decision that essentially killed the plea deal. Reese also expressed doubt about Fard’s potential for rehabilitation and paying the money back.
Assistant Utah Attorney General Richard Hamp said anticipation that immigration authorities may deport Fard, as well as the risk that Fard could be acquitted at trial, were among the reasons why he agreed to a deal that would have secured six felony convictions. Defense Attorney Spencer said his client wants to stay in the United States and work while on probation to pay back the money.
Hamp and the victims are doubtful they will ever see any restitution because Fard has no financial resources and no legitimate job skills.
“Mr. Fard’s business is committing fraud – and he is very good at it,” Hamp said.
Ron Perry says Fard bilked him for $100,000 in phony real estate ventures and other dealings. He said he would rather see Fard in prison than get his money back because he is convinced Fard will scam others.
“He should be in forever,” Perry said. “He should not be loose.”
Judge Reese said Fard can be appointed a public defender and can choose to either withdraw or affirm his guilty plea. If he chooses to withdraw the plea, it will mean the case will basically start over and could eventually head to trial.
A hearing has been slated for Feb. 27 to review the status of the case.
Comments