<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2873" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Sunil writes:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>"I do not share the concerns being expressed here about
offenders in jail being released for treatment. If these people were
considered a threat to take off and re-offend while on treatment release, they
would not be serving time after sentencing in the county jail. They would
be in prison. They would not be on probation, they would be serving out
their sentences in prison."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>"The people making the decisions do not get weepy-eyed
in the process of making these decisions. They are not on the verge of
getting away with something if not for you meddling kids."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Respectfully Sunil, please allow me to present a slightly
different perspective.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR> </DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=4>The above words I have cited from two of your recent posts
bring to mind a famous quote by the ethically challenged Richard Nixon:
"Trust me." Nothing personal Sunil, but in this case perhaps the
imprecation is "Trust us," where the "us" is the criminal justice
system.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I have posted a timely AP news story reprinted in
part in Saturday's <EM>Lewiston Morning Tribune</EM> showing how
inconsistently and thus unfairly parts of the criminal justice system
work. This story focuses on just a tiny, tiny bit of
the mammoth problems within the criminal justice system. When anyone in
the criminal justice system tells the public that we should just "Trust them"
<STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000>alarm bells</FONT></STRONG> should go ff
loudly. This is especially true when the uttering of "Trust us" is a
thinly disguised effort to curtail public inquisitiveness and discussion about
problems in the criminal justice system and the products therefrom.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Another old saw that is often applied to the criminal justice
system: "If you want to enjoy good sausage, never observe how it is
made." That may be true of "good" sausage. However, the products of
the criminal justice system are often far from being palatable.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>The criminal justice system is an advocacy system. It
should be no surprise that in such a system attorneys from both sides sometimes
become paid liars. Not only do they lie in court, but they lie to the
media and to the public. And the attorneys are not the only ones who
sometimes lie. Witnesses, including law enforcement officers, sometimes
lie. During the investigation of cases illegalities by law enforcement
sometimes occur. These illegalities can go undetected by others in the
justice system. Prejudices and preconceived ideas, pro and con,
about a suspect can sometimes influence the outcome of an
investigation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>In the advocacy system both sides are seldom evenly
matched. Attorneys on both sides vary greatly in ability, dedication,
personal energy, willingness or opportunity to spend enough time
examining/preparing a case, personal integrity, etc. Skillful defense
attorneys, their clients, and less frequently, their client's friends,
employers, etc often exploit personal relations/rapport with prosecutors in
order to reach the best deal for their clients -- which deal may not be the best
for the public.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Want a local example of sweetheart treatment from our county
prosecutor's office which illustrates the above paragraph?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I have reposted below a discussion of the Tamara Iverson
case. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Tamara Iverson was charged with embezzling $6,670 from
the Troy 4-H/FFA Booster Organization. Here is a description of the plea
bargain proposed by our prosecutor as described in an article in the <EM>Daily
News</EM> written by Hillary Hamm:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT color=#0000ff>"The plea agreement states that <FONT
color=#ff0000><STRONG>Iverson will receive a<FONT size=5> withheld
judgment</FONT> and be placed on probation</STRONG></FONT> for an amount of time
to be determined by Superior Court Judge John Stegner. </FONT>
<P><FONT color=#0000ff>Iverson also must pay a restitution amount of
approximately $5,000, Evans said. She has already voluntarily repaid the booster
organization nearly $3,500 within the last year. </FONT>
<P><FONT color=#ff0000><STRONG>The plea agreement does not include incarceration
<FONT size=4>because of jail time she already served in a similar embezzlement
case</FONT>. </STRONG></FONT>
<P><FONT color=#0000ff>In June 2003, Iverson was found guilty in a federal court
for embezzling $10,950 from customer accounts while she was employed by U.S.
Bank in Moscow. She was sentenced to two months imprisonment, four years
probation and restitution of $10,950."</FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>A wonderful plea bargain proposal!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Fortunately, Judge Stegner had better ideas. See
below.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>So when it comes to the products of the criminal justice
system, the watchwords should be "Don't trust us! Watch us
carefully." </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Part of the solution to the problems in the criminal
justice system includes having the public become much more aware of what goes
on, not less. To achieve this goal means that a much more vigilant,
aggressive media, a much more open and informative law enforcement and
prosecutor's office, and a more concerned, involved public is needed. I
offer the Sitler case <EM>in toto</EM> as evidence for this position. The
criminal justice system is the public's business. The more information the
public are provided about it, the better judgments the public can make
and actions they can take.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Sunil also writes with respect to serial pedophile Sitler
running around unescorted:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>"2. If he screws around when he is
supposed to be going to treatment, perhaps between his treatment provider and
the jail personnel, someone will know how to use a PHONE and figure out he isn't
where he's supposed to be. And if this is a violation of his probation,
please see No. 1 above."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Keely, Saundra, Donovan, et al, have already commented on the
absurdity of this practice.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>The claim by Sunil is that if Sitler defiles some child
while unescorted he will be caught and go back to jail.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>1. Why should we place any children at risk
<STRONG>at all</STRONG> to being assaulted by a serial pedophile <STRONG><FONT
color=#0000ff>undergoing treatment</FONT></STRONG>? Sitler is
<STRONG><FONT color=#0000ff>undergoing treatment</FONT></STRONG>. That
means he is not yet cured, if he will ever be. Is this unescorted practice
mean we are using innocent, unaware children as bait to test the ongoing
treatment's effectiveness?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>2. Sunil assumes that if Sitler reoffends
while unescorted, he will be caught. It only takes a moment for a
pedophile to perform some horribly vile act on a momentarily
unattended, surprised child, and then be off before anyone realizes
what has happened. Sitler has demonstrated some really amazing craft so
far in his practice of pedophilia. He has managed to molest children on
many occasions while their parents were just a room or so away! It is
folly to think that if he reoffended while unescorted he would certainly get
caught.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I appreciate the budgetary concerns of the LCSO in this
matter. We need all the paid officers we have doing more fruitful things
than taxiing pedophiles around. <FONT color=#0000ff><STRONG>Perhaps an
unpaid member of the sheriff's office's reserve or even responsible citizen
volunteers could do the escorting. This would not be a perfect solution,
but would offer much more protection to the community than the current
practice.</STRONG></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>There is another important aspect of this problem, the
decision of whether a particular offender is "safe" to be trusted unescorted,
but this more appropriately discussed in a detail examination of the Sitler plea
bargain. But just a hint: How many times have news articles
reported that pedophiles have reoffended, including murdering their
victims, after they have been pronounced "cured?"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<BR><A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>_______________________________</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT>
<P class=rddateline><FONT size=2>Friday, June 9, 2006 · Last updated 11:02 a.m.
PT</FONT></P>
<P class=rdheadline><STRONG><FONT size=5>Is justice for sale in Whatcom
County?</FONT></STRONG></P>
<P class=rdbyline>By GENE JOHNSON<BR>AP LEGAL AFFAIRS WRITER</P><!--BEGIN ARTICLE--></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><FONT size=2>
<P><FONT size=3>BELLINGHAM, Wash. -- Neither Joshua Sutton nor Joseph Hubbard
had any criminal history when they bought $15,000 worth of marijuana from an
undercover detective in Whatcom County last year. Both were arrested and charged
with unlawful possession with intent to deliver, a felony.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>But then their cases diverged dramatically, thanks to a practice
which has been routine for nearly three decades in this county on the Canadian
border, where federal agents dump reams of drug cases on local officials every
year.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Sutton, who put up most or all of the money for the drug buy,
paid $9,040 to a fund administered by the Whatcom County prosecutor. He was
allowed to plead guilty to a reduced misdemeanor charge, received a suspended
sentence and went on his way. His payment was nearly double the maximum fine for
the misdemeanor.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Hubbard, a construction worker, pleaded guilty as charged and
was sentenced to 45 days on a work crew. The felony on his record means he loses
the right to vote, and it could affect his ability to land a job for the rest of
his life.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Their cases illustrate the inequality of an unusual system in
which defendants with quick access to $2,000 or more can often "buy down" the
charges against them, many legal experts say. In some cases reviewed by the AP,
people caught with several pounds of marijuana pleaded guilty to reduced
misdemeanor charges after paying thousands of dollars to the county's fund. In
another, a young man caught with less than 2 ounces pleaded guilty to a felony
after he failed to pay.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"Yikes, it sounds like the sale of indulgences in the old
Catholic church," said Janet Ainsworth, a criminal law professor at Seattle
University. "If you were to have a continuum between paying a fine and bribery,
this is somewhere in between."</FONT></P>
<DIV style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FLOAT: right; TEXT-ALIGN: center">
<DIV><FONT size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<P class=rddateline><FONT size=3>The money, which must be paid up front, is
directed to the county's drug enforcement fund. It's disbursed by Prosecutor
Dave McEachran with court approval, and is used to buy new equipment for the
county's drug task force, to help pay the salaries of certain sheriff's
officers, for drug investigations and for drug court. In the past three years,
defendants have paid the fund $432,000, McEachran said. McEachran's 10 criminal
deputy prosecutors handle about 500 drug cases a year. </FONT></P>
<P></P>
<P><FONT size=3>The county keeps all money paid into the drug fund - unlike
regular fines, which must be split with the state.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Steven Mura, the presiding judge of Whatcom County Superior
Court, said his calendar is often so swamped that he gives only a cursory glance
to plea agreements before signing them. He said he would be interested if a
lawyer were to challenge drug fund payments as part of plea deals.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"It can appear to be the purchase of a lesser charge," Mura
said.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Several lawyers began questioning the practice this spring,
after news stories detailed a similar but distinct practice in the central
Washington city of Kennewick, where defendants in misdemeanor cases saw their
charges dismissed or reduced in exchange for contributions to charities selected
by the prosecutor. There, $18,000 in charity contributions vanished.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>There are no allegations of missing money in Whatcom County. In
interviews with the AP, McEachran defended the practice, which he inaugurated in
the late 1970s, as ethically sound. The payments, he argued, should be
considered a fine, part of the penalty for the offense - just like restitution
in embezzlement cases. In such cases, defendants often get less jail time if
they can repay the victims.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>But several lawyers, law professors and other prosecutors drew a
distinction. This isn't restitution, they said, and it's not a penalty
prescribed by law: It's a payment to avoid punishment.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"Plea bargaining isn't always pretty, but this just seems to
make a mockery of it," said Helen Anderson, who teaches criminal law at the
University of Washington law school.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"You kind of wonder, 'Gee, is this quite right?'" said
Bellingham defense attorney Thomas Fryer. "But if you're looking at it as the
best possible arrangement for your client, you're not going to just take a
stand. If that means a drug fund contribution, so be it."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>McEachran insists his prosecutors strive to be fair, and
disputes the notion that the system favors those most able to pay: "We just
don't see that."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>McEachran said his office entered into a deal with Sutton
because it had less evidence against him: Though Sutton drove by repeatedly and
was in cell phone contact as Hubbard bought the 7 pounds of marijuana, Sutton
never touched the drugs. Hubbard was caught red-handed, so he wouldn't have been
offered a deal, McEachran said.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>The AP found several cases in which people caught with more
marijuana than Hubbard made drug fund payments in exchange for reduced charges.
Hubbard's lawyer, Andrew Subin of Bellingham, suggested the only reason his
client didn't get a deal was because he's poor. He drives a $500 truck and often
works seven days a week to support his girlfriend's handicapped child, Subin
said.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>When Sutton's charge was reduced to a gross misdemeanor, Subin
asked the deputy prosecutor, Craig Chambers, "Where's my deal?" Chambers
directed an interview request to McEachran, but according to Subin, his response
was: "When your guy has $10,000, then we can talk."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"Who's the big player, and who walks away from this getting
screwed?" said Subin. He also wondered: If the case against Sutton was so weak,
why did it cost him nearly $10,000 to have the charge reduced?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Sutton's lawyer, Jeff Steinborn of Seattle, supports Whatcom
County's practice.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"Anything that mitigates the harshness of this insane drug law
is a good thing," he said.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Another of Subin's clients, 22-year-old community college
student Jesse Gilsoul, pleaded guilty to felony marijuana possession last month
for having less than 2 ounces of marijuana. Prosecutors offered him the chance
to pay $2,000 to have the charge reduced to a misdemeanor, according to both
sides.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Gilsoul, who lost one of his two restaurant jobs following his
arrest in December, said he did not have the money. He was sentenced to a month
of community service and $1,800 in fines and court costs, to be paid as he is
able. He fears the felony, his first offense, will jeopardize his financial
aid.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"I wish I did have that rich uncle," Gilsoul said. "Obviously,
if I was making a profit off drugs, I could come up with a couple grand real
easily."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>McEachran had little sympathy, noting that Gilsoul failed a
lie-detector test when he said he did not intend to sell the marijuana. But the
test was administered after Gilsoul failed to pay the drug fund. If he had come
up with the money, the issue of his honesty would never have arisen.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Subin acknowledged that defendants don't necessarily have to pay
to have charges reduced - it just helps.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Jon Ostlund, the Whatcom County public defender, said he could
think of two cases where charges were reduced because the defendant agreed to
perform 240 hours of community service before sentencing. Prompted partly by the
AP's reporting, his office held a meeting about the practice recently; staff
members said they would like to see more cases in which alternatives to the drug
fund payment are accepted.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"If there's a policy that rich people can buy their way out of a
case, I don't have the impression that's what's happening here," Ostlund said.
But, he added, "I'm sure there are cases where we weren't able to work out
something, and maybe they would have been able to if they had more
money."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>Irwin Schwartz, chairman of the American Bar Association's
criminal standards committee, declined to comment on Whatcom County's practice,
but said he hopes to form a task force to examine "best practices" for handling
drug courts, deferred prosecutions and nonprosecution agreements.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>A spokeswoman at the National District Attorneys Association
said she had not heard of the practice being used in other states, and Pam
Loginsky, a spokeswoman with the Washington Association of Prosecuting
Attorneys, said she had never heard of a county in Washington state negotiating
drug fund payments as part of plea deals.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>The prosecutor's offices in King, Snohomish, Pierce and Spokane
counties all said money is not on the table when they negotiate plea
deals.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"We do reduce a lot of felony drug charges to misdemeanor
charges, but it's not based on whether you can pay a $1,000 fine," said Joan
Cavagnaro, chief criminal deputy prosecutor in Snohomish County. "It's based on
the strength of the case."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>John Strait, a legal ethics expert at Seattle University Law,
said four lawyers have contacted him recently with questions about Whatcom
County's practice. He noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down systems
where defendants can choose between paying a fine or doing time, because it
often means jail for those who can't afford to pay.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>There's also a potential conflict of interest, he said, because
McEachran's office is making charging decisions based in part on the money it
can obtain for a fund he administers.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3>"We should be punishing people for what they've done, rather
than by who's going to give us money," Strait said.</FONT></P>
<P
class=rddateline><!--END ARTICLE--></FONT>_____________________________________</P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Concerned Latah County Citizens,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Below the line is an article from today's (03/27/04) <EM>Daily
News</EM> written by Hillary Hamm.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Does anyone have any concern about the sentence being agreed
to by the Latah County Prosecutor's Office?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>The is the second offense of a large amount of money stolen by
the criminal. The first crime: theft of $10,950 from a local
bank. The second crime (pending adjudication): theft of $6,670 from
<FONT size=3><FONT size=4>the <STRONG>Troy 4-H/FFA Booster
Organization.</STRONG> How much lower can you
get?</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>A plea bargain is being offered by the prosecutor's office
with no jail time and with a withheld judgment to boot.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Why a plea bargain? Why no jail time? Why a
withheld judgment? We are not talking about shoplifting a candy bar from
WalMart. We are talking about two large thefts. Is the Latah county
Prosecutor's office running a spa for serious offenders? What are they
thinking?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>What message does this proposed sentence send to potential
embezzlers? Does it mean that if you are not caught, all is OK. If
you are caught, you only have to give the money back, but not go to jail and not
have a record of the crime. Sounds like a win-win situation for the
criminal. Will didos like this attract more criminals to Latah
County?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Why doesn't the prosecutor's office take the case to
trial and let the chips fall where they may? I thought that was what
taxpayers were paying for.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Has the sloth in the county prosecutor's office now reached
such a dizzy height that even seasoned law enforcement officers are openly
appalled by many of the plea bargains made?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Am I missing something? Does anyone agree or disagree
with the prosecutor's decision?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Please educate me.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Wayne</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Art Deco (Wayne Fox)<BR><A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>__________________________________________</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<H2>Deary woman to face charges of grand theft </H2><BR>
<ADDRESS>Hillary Hamm</ADDRESS><BR>A Deary woman will appear in court May 3 on
charges of grand theft.
<P>Tamara Iverson, 35, has been charged with the felony for allegedly embezzling
$6,670 from the Troy 4-H/FFA Booster Organization between January 2000 and
January 2003 when she acted as treasurer for the groups.
<P>Latah County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Michelle Evans said a tentative plea
agreement has been reached with Iverson.
<P>"Basically, we want her to be held accountable to all the victims and the
community because she's destroyed a lot of faith and trust in that organization
and that needs to be rebuilt," Evans said.
<P>Iverson's attorney, Gregory Dickison of Moscow, could not be reached for
comment.
<P>The plea agreement states that Iverson will receive a withheld judgment and
be placed on probation for an amount of time to be determined by Superior Court
Judge John Stegner.
<P>Iverson also must pay a restitution amount of approximately $5,000, Evans
said. She has already voluntarily repaid the booster organization nearly $3,500
within the last year.
<P>The plea agreement does not include incarceration because of jail time she
already served in a similar embezzlement case.
<P>In June 2003, Iverson was found guilty in a federal court for embezzling
$10,950 from customer accounts while she was employed by U.S. Bank in Moscow.
She was sentenced to two months imprisonment, four years probation and
restitution of $10,950.
<P>Members of Troy 4-H/FFA Booster Organization reported the latest alleged
embezzlement in June. Iverson became treasure of the organization in 1999 and
was responsible for the checkbook and bank account until 2003.
<P>
<P>Hillary Hamm can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext. 228, or by e-mail at <A
href="mailto:hhamm@dnews.com">hhamm@dnews.com</A></P>
<P>____________________________________</P>
<DIV><FONT size=4>All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>This is the case of the woman who committed felony grand theft
twice in less than a two year period. Prosecutor William Thompson and
defense attorney Gregory Dickinson originally reached a plea bargain for the
second offense that called for no jail time and a withheld judgment! Judge
Stegner refused that proposal. Kudos for Judge Stegner!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Wayne</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<H2>Troy woman sentenced for felony grand theft </H2><BR>A Troy woman was
sentenced Tuesday to 60 days in jail for felony grand theft.
<P>Tamara K. Iverson, 36, will begin her jail time today for embezzling more
than $6,000 from the Troy 4-H/FFA Booster Organization from January 2000 to
January 2003.
<P>Latah County 2nd District Court Judge John Stegner ordered that Iverson not
be allowed work release privileges, and that she be placed on supervised felony
probation for five years after her jail time.
<P>She will be required to undergo mental health treatment and provide 100 hours
of community service.
<P>Stegner also ordered that Iverson not be employed in any position that would
allow her to work with financial records, credit agreements or anything
connected with youth organizations without the consent of her probation officer.
<P>Iverson must make written apologies to all 4-H and FFA participants and
contributors and pay a restitution amount to be determined at a hearing Tuesday.
<P>In June 2003, Iverson also was found guilty of embezzling $10,950 from
customer accounts while she was employed by U.S. Bank in Moscow.
<P>She was sentenced to two months imprisonment, four years probation and
restitution of $10,950. </P></DIV>
<P><BR><BR> </P></DIV></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>