← Blazar Token / John A. DeSalvoreviewed 2026-10-21 · 16 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Blazar Token / John A. DeSalvo against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.
Read this first
These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.
“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.
Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.
disputed
1 claimThe reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.
- #8[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Background: John A. DeSalvo
“John A. DeSalvo, approximately 47 years old at the time of charges, was a former lieutenant with the New Jersey Department of Corrections based in Linwood, New Jersey (Cape May County).”
reviewerDeSalvo was based in Linwood, New Jersey, located in Cape May CountyThe page pairs 'Linwood' (a real but different address for DeSalvo, per the NJ AG) with the county of Marmora (Cape May County), producing a town/county combination that does not exist. The section's own cited source (Inquirer) says Marmora, Cape May County, so the correction restores internal and source consistency; an equally valid fix would be 'Linwood, New Jersey (Atlantic County).'Proposed correction (not yet applied)John A. DeSalvo, approximately 47 years old at the time of charges, was a former lieutenant with the New Jersey Department of Corrections based in Marmora, New Jersey (Cape May County).
unverifiable
2 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #11[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Earlier Investment Fraud Scheme (Brokerage-1)
“falsely claiming he had been 'averaging close to 1200% over the last two years' in stock, options, and cryptocurrency trading”
reviewerDeSalvo falsely claimed 'averaging close to 1200% over the last two years' in tradingCould not locate the exact '1200%' figure in any source reachable by search or direct fetch; it is plausible (consistent with SEC boilerplate about 'extraordinary returns') but not independently confirmed here. - #15[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“Sentencing hearing scheduled before U.S. District Judge Brian R. Martinotti for the criminal securities fraud case. DeSalvo faced a maximum of 20 years in prison per count. Specific sentence imposed has not been publicly reported in available sources.”
reviewerSentencing was scheduled for August 6, 2024, and the specific sentence imposed has not been publicly reportedThe August 6, 2024 scheduling is confirmed. No search turned up a reported sentencing outcome, which is notable given more than two years have passed and the SEC civil matter settled as recently as August 2026 -- this looks like a genuine reporting gap rather than an error on the page, but it should be flagged for follow-up (see coverage_gaps).
link rot
3 claimsA cited source no longer resolves or no longer says what the page attributes to it.
- #5[link rot][awaiting moderator]in section: SEC Civil Action and August 2026 Settlement
“On August 4, 2026, the SEC filed a consent and proposed final judgment with the court resolving the civil action.”
reviewerThe SEC reached a civil settlement in August 2026 ordering disgorgement of $681,105The underlying facts about the August 2026 settlement are accurate and independently confirmed, but the page (and its source list) cites SEC Litigation Release lr-25814 as the source -- that release only covers the 2023 complaint. The actual settlement was announced under LR-26599. This is a mis-citation, not a factual error, but it means a reader clicking the cited link will not find the settlement it is attached to.Proposed correction (not yet applied)On August 4, 2026, the SEC filed a consent and proposed final judgment with the court resolving the civil action (SEC Litigation Release No. 26599). - #6[link rot][awaiting moderator]in the cited sources
“https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr-25814”
reviewerThe SEC reached a civil settlement in August 2026 ordering disgorgement of $681,105 (sources_used entry)Same underlying citation defect as the sections[7] finding -- the sources_used list entry labeled 'SEC Litigation Release lr-25814: John A. DeSalvo' is being used to source settlement content it does not contain.Proposed correction (not yet applied)https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26599 - #7[link rot][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“FX News Group / SEC Litigation Release lr-25814”
reviewerSEC Litigation Release lr-25814 is the source for the August 2026 settlement timeline entryThird occurrence of the same wrong litigation-release number; the event text and date in this timeline row are accurate, only the cited release number is wrong.Proposed correction (not yet applied)FX News Group / SEC Litigation Release lr-26599
partially supported
1 claimThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #10[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Earlier Investment Fraud Scheme (Brokerage-1)
“He solicited approximately $95,000 to $100,000 from roughly 17 to 20 investors, falsely claiming he had been 'averaging close to 1200% over the last two years' in stock, options, and cryptocurrency trading.”
reviewerDeSalvo raised approximately $95,000 to $100,000 from roughly 17 to 20 investors in the Brokerage-1 schemeThe dollar range and investor-count range are both defensible as a reconciliation of two different authorities (SEC's civil figures vs. DOJ's criminal-case figures), but the 'averaging close to 1200% over the last two years' quotation could not be independently located in any source consulted -- it may be lifted from an underlying charging document not available in general search indexes. That specific quoted figure is unverifiable rather than confirmed.
confirmed
9 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in the summary
“DeSalvo raised at least $623,888 from approximately 222 investors through materially false representations”
reviewerDeSalvo raised at least $623,888 from approximately 222 investors through the Blazar Token schemeExact figures match the underlying SEC complaint as echoed in both the 2023 press release (rounded) and the 2026 settlement litigation release (exact). - #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: The Blazar Token Scheme
“DeSalvo created and launched Blazar Token in November 2021, marketing it to police officers, firefighters, EMTs, and other first responders as a 'crypto pension' that would supplement existing state pension plans.”
reviewerDeSalvo launched/marketed Blazar Token beginning November 2021 as a 'crypto pension'A Philadelphia Inquirer passage suggests the token didn't technically reach market until April 2022, but the two primary SEC-sourced accounts (press release and Fox Business) both date the launch to November 2021, so the page's dating is adequately supported. - #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Rug-Pull: Token Collapse in May 2022
“He sold over 41 billion of his own Blazar tokens on the PancakeSwap decentralized exchange.”
reviewerIn May 2022 DeSalvo sold over 41 billion Blazar tokens on PancakeSwap, collapsing the priceWell corroborated across independent outlets and a blockchain research source. - #4[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Federal Criminal Charges and Guilty Plea
“On March 25, 2024, DeSalvo pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Brian R. Martinotti in Newark federal court to two counts of securities fraud under a two-count Information.”
reviewerDeSalvo pleaded guilty to federal securities fraud charges in March 2024 (specifically March 25, 2024, before Judge Brian R. Martinotti)Consistent across DOJ, TRM Labs, Breaking AC and njbiz reporting. - #9[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Background: John A. DeSalvo
“John A. DeSalvo, approximately 47 years old at the time of charges”
reviewerDeSalvo was approximately 47 years old at the time of chargesConfirmed by two independent sources. - #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Federal Criminal Charges and Guilty Plea
“The New Jersey Attorney General's Office filed parallel state charges including second-degree theft by deception and fourth-degree business practices.”
reviewerOn August 23, 2023, DeSalvo was charged with two counts each of wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering, plus parallel state charges of second-degree theft by deception and fourth-degree deceptive business practicesConfirmed by the primary NJ Attorney General release. - #13[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Misappropriation of Investor Funds
“One victim, a federal law enforcement agent, invested approximately $50,000 including children's college funds on the expectation of 20% returns.”
reviewerOne victim, a federal law enforcement agent, invested approximately $50,000 including children's college fundsDirectly confirmed by the cited article. - #14[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Federal Criminal Charges and Guilty Plea
“Investigators included the FBI Atlantic City Resident Agency and the New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice.”
reviewerInvestigators included the FBI Atlantic City Resident Agency and the New Jersey Division of Criminal JusticeConfirmed via independent corroboration (direct fetch of the DOJ page itself returned HTTP 401, likely anti-bot blocking rather than the page being dead). - #16[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Targeting of Law Enforcement Community
“The SEC's press release specifically highlighted that the scheme 'targeted law enforcement personnel,' and the DOJ similarly framed the case as fraud against first responders.”
reviewerDeSalvo specifically and deliberately targeted law enforcement, firefighters and EMTs, which regulators treated as an aggravating factorConfirmed by both regulator headlines.
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.