A Trusted Employee

Among the complaints scheduled for hearing in Ohio is a matter alleging failure to supervise an embezzling employee and to reconcile an IOLTA account

WTOV 9 reported on the criminal case against the secretary

A former Bridgeport law office secretary received the stiffest sentence possible in a Belmont County courtroom on Wednesday.

Sliva stole more than $185,000 during a 10-year period and through multiple transactions. The crime was identified by the state auditor, and according to her defense attorney, Sliva stole the money because of an enormous financial crisis within her family.

Sliva stole more than $185,000 during a 10-year period and through multiple transactions. The crime was identified by the state auditor, and according to her defense attorney, Sliva stole the money because of an enormous financial crisis within her family.

Sliva was a trusted employee of former judge and practicing attorney William Davis for 32 years. On Wednesday, she apologized before the court.

“I’m sorry,” she said. “I didn’t mean to do it.”

Judge Frank Fregiato disagreed with the defense’s pleas for sympathy.

“The comment has also been made that if I send her to prison, there may not be restitution. That to me is an incredible self-serving statement. You state 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 in this court,” Fregiato said.

Fregiato sentenced Sliva to 3 years in prison and ordered restitution in the case.

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

Davis says he was shocked to learn his longtime, trusted employee, was capable of such a crime.

“We were very busy. I was a judge 20 hours a week, and I was an attorney 40 hours a week. I was working from 8 in the morning to 9 or 10 at night, and I just put too must trust in one person,” he said.

For him, repayment was important, but prison time was paramount.

“Really, I wanted some incarceration, some penalty for doing what she did,” he said. “I didn’t want a slap on the wrist in this case.”

A third charge of money laundering is pending against Sliva and is dependent on her ability to repay $100,000 in restitution in 30 days.

(Mike Frisch)