“A Very Trusted, Very Valuable Employee”

Jayne Sliva, 54, of 935 State Highway 250, Adena, heard her sentence Wednesday when she appeared before Belmont County Common Pleas Judge Frank Fregiato. The judge imposed the maximum penalty of 36 months behind bars for one count of aggravated theft, a felony of the third degree, and 180 days for one count of tampering with records, a misdemeanor of the first degree. The sentences will be served concurrently for a total of 36 months.

Sliva had worked as a bookkeeper for Davis Law Office in Bridgeport from its founding in 2001 until 2012. Sliva’s duties included managing payments from clients, expenses associated with legal services, recording payments in the receipt book and handling deposits.

The theft was discovered when the law office took on a partner, becoming Davis & Kotur in November 2014. A standard audit turned up some discrepancies. The Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation then conducted a forensic audit and concluded that a total of $185,365.75 had been skimmed during Sliva’s period of employment.

Restitution of the total amount was ordered, with $100,000 to be paid within 30 days. When this initial payment is made, the state will drop a third charge, money laundering, a felony of the third degree.

During sentencing the victim, attorney and former judge William Davis, spoke, saying Sliva was both a trusted and highly paid member of his staff.

“She was a very trusted, very valuable employee, and obviously she betrayed me,”Davis said. “I don’t see any reason for leniency and a slap on the wrist in this case.”

Afterward, he spoke about the impact of the crime.

“It was shocking. I didn’t want to believe it. I thought, ‘Well maybe there’s checks that bounced, some other reason this money’s not there. Maybe we paid it out of the wrong account.’ She worked for me for so long, and she always said, ‘You can trust me.’ Then the amount kept getting bigger and bigger and bigger, and I finally realized that it had to be her. She was the only one who had access to all the money and all the funds. It started out, we thought it was going to be $10,000-$20,000, then it became $30,000, then $60,000 then $100,000. It just kept getting bigger and bigger as we got more and more into it,” he said. “I just never expected that I would be here today. That’s someone I really trusted, and it was a total deception.

“I thought I had things covered, but she found a way to get around our bookkeeping. She put everything on the books, but then when she went to make the deposit in the bank she skimmed $500 this week, $700 the following week. She was skimming cash every week,” he said, adding it was difficult to track the money at the time.

“We were very busy. I was a judge 20 hours a week, I was an attorney 40 hours a week. I was working from 8 a.m. in the morning to 9-10 p.m. I just put too much trust in one person. Now I handle the money myself.”

Davis added that while restitution was a factor, he had chiefly been interested in incarceration as an appropriate punishment.

The prosecution pointed out that the crimes were compounded by a violation of trust and a relationship with the victim, which increased the seriousness of the offense in the eyes of the law. In addition, the crimes reflect poorly on the legal system and trustworthiness of the people working in that system.

Fregiato said the aspects of the crime, including the deliberate planning and execution, necessitated a prison sentence.

“This is a crime that went on for 10 years,” Fregiato said. “She plotted her exact course of conduct.”

He also commented on the value of deterring similar crimes.

“This court agrees there have been embezzlement cases in the Ohio Valley. That has got to stop. I’m sending a message of deterrence to all individuals in a position of trust that you do not act this way,” Fregiato added.

In addition, Fregiato rejected the argument that prison time would interfere with the process of making restitution.

“That, to me, is an incredible self-serving statement,” he said. “You steal X, Y and Z and say, ‘Don’t do anything about it, or I can’t give you back X, Y and Z. That flies in the face of reason to this court. I don’t know where one thinks that one can steal $185,000, almost $200,000, and not go to prison for it. That is incredible to this court. If you steal $200,000, especially plotting and deceiving and conniving to do it over 10 years, prison may be the only recourse,” he said. “This is a case of embezzlement and that will stop in Belmont County, Ohio.”

(Mike Frisch)