FirstAlerts

Lawrence Mayor Brian Depena Charged with Pandemic Loan Fraud and Money Laundering

Federal prosecutors have charged Lawrence Mayor Brian Depena with fraudulently obtaining over $1.5 million in pandemic relief loans.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 15, 2026, 12:28 p.m. ET
Developing

This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.

More on this incident

On August 14, 2026, Mayor Brian Depena of Lawrence, Massachusetts, was arrested and in federal court with one count of wire fraud and one count of money laundering, according to charging documents from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts. The matter remains at the charging stage and is undecided. The details contained in the charging documents are allegations, and Depena is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law. According to official records, prosecutors allege that Depena, 61, fraudulently obtained over $1.5 million in Economic Injury Disaster Loans for his business, Tenares Tire Services Inc., during 2020 and 2021. Prosecutors allege that rather than using the taxpayer-funded loans for required working capital, Depena used the proceeds to pay $85,000 in personal IRS tax debts, write checks totaling tens of thousands of dollars to his mayoral campaign account, and pay off $883,293 in high-interest mortgages on various Lawrence properties he owned. U.S. Attorney Leah B. Foley stated that Depena betrayed the trust of his constituents through alleged corruption and lies. Ted E. Docks, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Boston Division, stated that emergency assistance was meant as a safety net for struggling businesses rather than a personal fund. Thomas Demeo, Special Agent in Charge of the Internal Revenue Service Investigation Boston Field Office, said the agency remains committed to holding accountable those who abuse federal relief funds. If convicted, each charge of wire fraud carries a maximum statutory penalty of up to 20 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $250,000. Each money laundering charge carries a statutory maximum of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a $250,000 fine.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 115 Aug 2026, 16:28current

    First published.

  2. Version 115 Aug 2026, 16:19current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble β€” all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.