Woman Steals from Kids

The wife of Little League’s treasurer stole $35,000 from the organization. Treasurer Dennis Steljes was charged initially, but it turns out he knew nothing about it.  #

8 Responses to “Woman Steals from Kids”


  • It’s amazing how much of that sort of thing happens to nonprofit organizations. If banks would get on the ball and offer multiple login roles for online banking, this problem could disappear overnight.

  • Okay, I want to see what this woman’s sentence for embezzling is/will be for stealing 35k compared to This woman’s sentence for stealing 24k and compared to Comer’s sentence (which was put off from it’s originally scheduled date of April 2010) for stealing 600k.

    When they do finally sentence Comer I hope Cvillenews will compare and contrast the 3 different jail terms (or lack thereof).

  • @Jim Wolf: Since this was the wife of the treasurer, I don’t think account roles would have helped — she probably used his saved password in the web browser.

  • Er, well, *could* have. I guess she used cashier checks instead — again with having access to what her husband had access to.

  • Jiles Perry Richardson

    Bad idea, Just Bob. There are many reasons for differing penalties which the public neither knows nor could appreciate if they knew.

    One example of someone who earns leniency: a cooperative perp who pleads guilty, supplies the necessary details for the prosecutor to make the case and trace the missing money, and has potential for paying back what he stole.

    A lot less cost to the taxpayer and expenditure of effort there than the lying perp who denies she did it and challenges the prosecution to prove the charge.

    An offer of a deal, perhaps even probation rather than jail, is one of the ways of making a perp cooperative.

    As a taxpayer, I don’t want an ignorant public involved in such decisions or passing judgment on what is beyond their experience. That’s the role of the legal community.

  • As a taxpayer, I don’t want an ignorant public involved in such decisions or passing judgment on what is beyond their experience. That’s the role of the legal community.

    Well in this situation you wouldn’t get that. And I wouldn’t consider Waldo “the Ignorant Public.” But it’s clear you do.

    What I think you’d get would be a post comparing and contrasting the decisions made- so that the ignorant unwashed masses could offer their ignorant unwashed opinions- and hopefully hold elected officials accountable for any double standards where appropriate.

  • I certainly think that there’s value in drawing a comparison, if only so that people can understand the circumstances under which different sentences are handed down. I’ve really enjoyed what I’ve learned when I’ve gone through that very exercise a couple of times before. Jiles, the very premise of our legal system is that it is based on decisions rendered by a jury of peers (aka “an ignorant public” :) using information that is public, with a decision that is public. Besides, isn’t education the best cure for ignorance?

  • crime and punishment at UVA

    “As a taxpayer, I don’t want an ignorant public involved in such decisions or passing judgment on what is beyond their experience. That’s the role of the legal community.”

    This certainly smacks of arrogance. This person doesn’t want the public to pass judgment on our legal system?

    Three words: This is America.

Comments are currently closed.

Sideblog