Prosecutors want 4 years for former Officer Brady

Pictured: Keith Brady in an appearance on Shore Talk.

By Linda Cicoira

U.S. prosecutors asked for former Eastville Police Officer Jerry Keith Brady Jr. to be sentenced to four years in prison for wire fraud and money laundering, according to papers filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Norfolk.

The case against 39-year-old Brady, of Belle Haven, initially involved 12 counts of wire fraud and two of money laundering that were scheduled to be tried before a jury in November following his early September pleas of not guilty.

Later, in a bargaining agreement, he pleaded guilty to two indictments. The rest of the charges are set to be dismissed later this month at sentencing. All the charges involved his amassing about $820,000.

The maximum punishment for wire fraud is 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The maximum for money laundering is 10 years in prison. There was no agreement for punishment, and Brady is not protected from possible prosecution by any state government. A restitution order for the full amount of the victims’ losses is anticipated to be determined by the court. In addition, forfeiture of assets will be part of the sentence. The defendant agreed to fully participate in financial investigations, including the identification of assets and his tax returns for the previous five years.

Deputy Attorney General Todd W Blanche and Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph L. Kosky wrote in Friday’s filing, “Police officers hold positions of great trust, respect, and authority in any community in which they operate … They are expected to uphold the law. Their mission is to protect the community from those who break (the) law and wish to inflict harm. They are entrusted to investigate crimes that occur, to respond to life and death emergencies, and have the power to use deadly force, when necessary, in the line of duty.”

“When a police officer violates the law, a serious breach of trust has occurred,” the prosecution stated. “Even worse is when a police officer violates the law” by using “his position and authority as a law enforcement officer to perpetuate that crime. That’s exactly what defendant … Brady … did in this case,” they said.

Brady “worked as a trusted police officer in small, insular Eastern Shore communities for years. He was … well known in the community,” the filing continued. “What no one knew was that the defendant harbored a gambling problem. And to feed this problem, the defendant defrauded friends, acquaintances, and even strangers by convincing them that his position as a police officer meant he could be trusted.”

Prosecutors said Brady told the victims that “he was due to inherit a large amount of money from a recently deceased relative. Sometimes, he stated he was due to inherit land … the defendant claimed that the property or inheritance was tied up in probate court, and that he needed to pay hefty fees to settle the estate and get access to the property.” He “promised to repay his victims once these fees were paid and, in many instances, signed promissory notes to that effect.”

Instead, they contend, he used “the money to support his gambling addiction.” He made trips to casinos and gambled on online sports betting apps, but most of the money was gambled away at Queen machines or slot-style gambling machines set up at convenience stores. “The owners of these establishments told investigators that the defendant would sit there for hours gambling … His conduct occurred over approximately four years … and involved … at least 33 separate transactions.” They said Brady returned to his victims multiple times and sought more money from them. When the time for repayment arrived, the defendant always had an excuse (as to) why he needed more time or more money … On at least one occasion, he obtained money from one victim and used it to partially repay another victim. The defendant’s scheme was massive in scope, intricately executed, and designed in such a way as to exploit the trust and confidence that the public has in officers of the law.”

The prosecutors say the court should “consider these factors in weighing the nature and circumstances of the offense” and to “consider that this was an ongoing fraud scheme that only stopped when federal agents began investigating the defendant. If not for that, “the defendant would still be gambling and preying on members of the Eastern Shore communities to this day.”

“The defendant does receive credit for accepting responsibility, pleading guilty, and agreeing to be interviewed and cooperative with case agents … Although the defendant would appear to present a relatively low risk of recidivism, the government would note that the defendant’s record suggests he would not be a person who would engage in this type of fraudulent behavior in the first instance … A sentence of 48 months will most likely deter the defendant from engaging in future criminal activity.” They also stated, “the court must consider … sending a message to the community at large that fraud schemes such as these will not be tolerated.”

“While none of the defendant’s victims became insolvent or declared bankruptcy, they certainly suffered substantial financial hardship in other ways,” federal prosecutors stated. A victim identified by initials W.B. lost $55,700. He wrote in a letter, that “he became delinquent on property taxes, fell behind on business loans, which impacted cash flow and financial stability, sustained negative credit report entries, and lost capital gains from stock and bonds due to forced liquidations. W.B.’s hardships alone merit the loss of the zero-point offender credit. Other victims report needing to take out loans or conduct other financial transactions, and an impact on their retirement money.”

Brady claimed that “there is no indication that he intentionally used his position as a police officer to facilitate the crime. However, prosecutors said victim impact statements made it clear that victims trusted the defendant because he was a police officer.

Victim W.B. stated, “Mr. Brady was an entrusted law enforcement officer who deliberately cultivated a close personal relationship with me … Because of this close personal relationship and his position of public trust, I had no reason to doubt his honesty.” Victim D.B., who lost $51,000, wrote, “I did not know the defendant personally, yet was familiar with him due to the rural nature of our community and the fact that the defendant was an officer of the law for our small town… When I had direct interactions with him, he was almost always in uniform, arriving at my office in his patrol car.”

“These statements, along with other interviews of the defendant’s victims, all paint the same picture,” the prosecutors wrote… “The defendant traded on his position as a law enforcement officer within the community to convince his victims to trust him enough such that he could defraud them of over $800,000. Defendant utilized his uniform, his patrol car, and his position as a police officer to perpetuate this fraud. For these reasons, the defendant’s objection is without merit and should be overruled.

Sentencing is scheduled for Feb. 19. 2026.