- 26 -
Lawson did not embezzle the proceeds of the 282 checks from
Reaves Livestock. First, Mr. and Mrs. Reaves did not act like
victims of a nearly $500,000 embezzlement. They did not file
charges against Lawson or otherwise try to collect the funds from
Lawson or Southern National. Mr. Reaves contends that he wanted
to pursue Lawson and the bank, but his attorneys advised against
it, and the statute of limitations had run. He gave no
convincing reason why he waited after the period of limitations
had run to act. Mr. Reaves testified that an unnamed law
enforcement official administered lie detector tests to Mr.
Reaves, Mrs. Reaves, and Lawson. His explanation of his
purported efforts to recover the money lacked detail and was not
believable.
Second, we do not believe that nearly $500,000 left Reaves
Livestock without Mr. Reaves' knowledge. For example, Mr. Reaves
surely would have noticed that $35,000 was missing when Lawson
cashed four checks on August 28 and 29, 1986, based on Mr.
Reaves' testimony that he could detect errors of a few thousand
dollars in the weekly cash flow report.
Third, there is no evidence that Wright or Lawson used
nearly $500,000 in funds embezzled from Reaves Livestock.
Petitioners point out some expenditures that Lawson and Wright
made during the years in issue, but not enough to show that they
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011