Location: Tennessee, USA.
I was a vendor in a store that was run by an acquaintance from high school. For the first 6 months or so I was paid on time, everything was fine. Then pay got sporadic, till I was NOT paid for the last 6 months. It was all kinda informal, I was not pressed about it. There was a contract but this was a small business in my small home town, I am not great at accounting, and I was not expecting trouble.
I was notified the store was closing a couple of weeks ago. Then a detective called me investigating my friend from high school, asking questions about our business dealings. I told him what I knew, and that I would look at my records to see how much I was owed.
I learned through the grapevine that this girl is under investigation due to an attempted (or successful?) check fraud. The detective is recording everyone she has shafted.
I can document that I am owed $500 (retail value). I know that is small potatoes, and not worth pursuing individually. (I am not upset about the $ at all, but I am super annoyed at being tricked, essentially. )
Here’s what I would like to know-
Let’s say the detective documents that she had a $5,000 check fraud and additional $10,000 she owes business partners and vendors and other people she’s had opportunities to swindle. I looked up that the check fraud alone carries 2-12 years in jail; what does the additional fraud do to her charges or potential sentencing?
Thanks for reading and any discussion or info y’all can offer!
Comments
No way to tell, especially if she has no prior criminal record. Depends on what the prosecutor wants to charge, whether there’s a plea deal, how the judge looks at the situation, etc. In quite a few places it would be common to see someone without a criminal record receive probation for a first-time non-violent felony.
It’s not clear that there is any additional fraud. There’s a breach of contract, but that’s not a criminal matter.
It’s very likely that her unpaid business debts would be left to the creditors to deal with as a civil matter. Proving criminal fraud would require the police to investigate and find evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she undertook those debts or entered into those contracts with specific deceptive intent, which is much harder than merely proving that she hasn’t paid what she owes. I would expect the police to focus on the more easily proven issue of writing fraudulent checks.
However, if she is prosecuted for an additional $10k in criminal fraud, then it’s likely she’d be liable for an additional sentence of 3-15 years in prison, served either concurrently or sequentially with the sentence for the cheque fraud.