Lain

Source: Link

School counselor gets millions after typo
Woman jailed for allegedly using state funds for cars, jewelry, investments
The Associated Press
Updated: 4:08 p.m. HT May 30, 2007

MINNEAPOLIS - An errant computer keystroke led the state to accidentally issue a $2.5 million check to a school counselor — who spent thousands on cars, jewelry and electronics, prosecutors said.

Sabrina Walker, 37, was charged Tuesday with theft by swindle and concealing the proceeds of a crime. She remained in jail Wednesday in lieu of $200,000 bail.

The state's accounting system was handling money for the Department of Human Services that was intended for the Hennepin County Medical Center when the check was issued to Walker by mistake in March.

Walker was in the state's system because she was once paid $84 as a court witness. Investigators found that Walker's vendor number in the state system was only one number off the hospital's nine-digit number.

Walker, along with a man she lived with, allegedly bought a $500,000 certificate of deposit, funded two retirement accounts, bought a $500,000 Treasury bond, spent $5,500 on jewelry, $3,817 at Best Buy and $2,069 on limousine services, according to the criminal complaint.

Walker also allegedly bought two cars, called the state to report the check, then bought two more cars, prosecutors said.

She has been placed on leave until the case is resolved.

Her criminal attorney, Mark Larsen, said there was more to the story than just the criminal complaint submitted by prosecutors. The complaint "fails to recite all the pertinent facts," he said.

"This is a far cry from an individual who is turning her back on what has happened here," he said.

The Department of Human Services obtained a judge's order freezing Walker's bank account. The agency said Wednesday it was working into improve internal controls on manual payments.
----

So maybe it's wrong but sometimes, you don't really expect this sort of thing to happen. That is...of course...unless if you get that funny suspicion that something may be up.

Still, you can't exactly blame this woman just because she thought she was getting a million dollars. It's not like she knew it was for someone/something else. But I would have gotten a bit suspicious at first.

Indian Summer

I don't blame the woman at all. Reading this article, all I'm seeing is the state screwed up and they're trying to deflect blame. If this check had been in the name of the Medical Center and the woman had gotten her hands on it claiming to be a representative for the Center or something... then yeah, obviously that would be illegal. But she cashed a check in her name and spent the money the state had addressed to her. It isn't the person who receives a check's job to make sure the right amount of money was addressed to them- it's the person or entity from whom the money comes- in this case, the state.

Lain

Still...I would find it funny at first...but who could pass at that chance. This woman should not have been charged with theft and swindling since the check was addressed to her.

If anything, they should fire the person who made the typo in the first place.

Hell on Heels

I agree with you two on this. She shouldn't be charged with anything. She didn't break any laws as far as I can tell. She cashed a check with her name on it.

Raonaild

Maybe we don't know all the facts, but what would she think it was for? From the article, it sounds like she was sent a cheque for millions of dollars, out of the blue. It should have been obvious that it was a mistake that she should have brought to someone's attention right away. If it turned out it wasn't a mistake, then what would that have hurt?

It's like finding a wallet on the street - you know it's not yours, so the right thing to do is to return it to the owner with all its contents intact.

Indian Summer

It's not really, though. When you find a wallet on a street... it's truly not yours. It usually even has identifying information toward its owner. However, when you get a check in the mail addressed to you? That is yours. It doesn't matter why you got it or what you did to deserve it. That money's addressed to you, and it isn't your fault someone else screwed up. The state suing this woman because they're idiots doesn't make any sense.

*Ledi*

I completely agree with you. If I received a check on my name, I would spend it too.

elisheva

Even if it was a check you didn't expect to get or for some crazy amount? I don't know about you, but I never get any random cheques in the mail - just tax refunds - and I always check my pay stub when my salary is deposited. She didn't actively con anyone, but she definitely should have noticed something was weird.

Raonaild

Even if there were no legal obligation for someone to return such a cheque since it has her name on it, there's a moral obligation to not take money that isn't meant for you. She must've realized it was a mistake.

Another analogy: if you're selling something and the buyer gives you too much money without realizing it, the right thing to do is to tell them. If you're buying something and the seller accidently gives you too much change, you should say something. And in this case we're not talking about a few dollars - we're talking about $2.5 million dollars meant for a medical center.

Lain

Okay Raonalid and Indian, you guys brought up interesting points worth debating

Still, in my opinion, the theft charge was, and still is, ridiculous, as she did not exactly con or swindle anyone. I know not everyone is going to agree with me on this issue.

nopal

I agree that morally she should have notified someone that they had obviously made a mistake. But legally she did nothing wrong, and she shouldn't have charges brought against her because of another person's mistake.

abw92

I don't think that she should have charges brought against her. It's not her fault that the cheque was adressed to her. If I got a cheque adressed to me, I would think that it is mine.

elisheva

Honestly, I think you'd have to be either very, very, very stupid or just plain dishonest to keep a $2.5 million cheque and spend it. I'm pretty sure there must be laws - or at least school board regulations - about stuff like that. They may not have brought the most appropriate charges against her, but she definitely doesn't deserve to get off scot-free.

Indian Summer

The problem is, though, that we aren't talking morals. We're talking legality. They're suing her because they screwed up.

I still don't see this as the same thing. I get where you're coming from, but how was she to know they screwed up? Even if she suspected it, why is it her problem? The state should be keeping an eye on finances- especially when it comes to checks where the amount of money being doled out is worth suing over.

It says right in the article that she did contact the state. What it doesn't say, though, is how long it took the state to get back to her. We know she had the time to go out and buy two more cars, though.

Raonaild

Perhaps because there was no reason for them to send her a $2.5 million dollar check out of the blue? Why did she think she received that cheque?

There is such a thing as personal responsibility. How the state behaved is irrelevant - just because they screwed up, didn't mean that this woman had to take advantage of that. She could have chosen not to spend the money. It's nice that she contacted them and all, but by that time she'd already spent a chunk of the money. Why didn't she contact them before spending any of it?