The cheque stealing teller
(28 October 2009 – Australia) A week long trial has been conducted into seven specific transactions, throughout 2005, that saw a bank teller pocket A$70,000.
Sheryl Lyn Thacker is accused of stealing the money after seven transaction records show her falsifying records; Ms Thacker also had a warrant out for her arrest after she fled Darwin in 2003 while awaiting sentencing after admitting she had bounced a $20,000 cheque.
Bank records reportedly show Ms Thacker’s involvement in each of the cases, with the first transaction taking place on January 4, 2005, when the bank was asked to draw three cheques for settlement on a property.
One of the cheques was for A$6,452.50 and was drawn from an account that the bank held specifically for property settlements.
After the cheques were drawn, Ms Thacker debited the account with a further exact amount of A$6,452.50.
Normally in this situation the teller would sign off their till as a surplus outstanding at the end of the day, but Ms Thacker signed off that the till had balanced correctly.
She continued this method with four other transactions, in a further transaction she entered a cheque number that did not exist and withdrew the money, continuing to sign her till off as balanced.
However, the transaction that came to the attention of bank investigators was when a customer went to draw out A$10,000 from an account that should have had a balance of A$40,000.
The customer was told that they account had been closed and all of the money had been withdrawn.
In the end, the jury decided that the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming, and despite the amount and complexity of the evidence they quickly found against the accused.
Bank records reportedly show Ms Thacker’s involvement in each of the cases, with the first transaction taking place on January 4, 2005, when the bank was asked to draw three cheques for settlement on a property.
One of the cheques was for A$6,452.50 and was drawn from an account that the bank held specifically for property settlements.
After the cheques were drawn, Ms Thacker debited the account with a further exact amount of A$6,452.50.
Normally in this situation the teller would sign off their till as a surplus outstanding at the end of the day, but Ms Thacker signed off that the till had balanced correctly.
She continued this method with four other transactions, in a further transaction she entered a cheque number that did not exist and withdrew the money, continuing to sign her till off as balanced.
However, the transaction that came to the attention of bank investigators was when a customer went to draw out A$10,000 from an account that should have had a balance of A$40,000.
The customer was told that they account had been closed and all of the money had been withdrawn.
In the end, the jury decided that the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming, and despite the amount and complexity of the evidence they quickly found against the accused.
Subscribe