Assignment On Debra Anne Chapin White Collar Crime

News Article Analysis

The news article that I decided to do my assignment on is about a bank manager, Debra Anne Chapin, that embezzled 2 million dollars from a bank. The news article’s title is, “Former manager jailed for cheating bank out of $2M; Woman used cash to pay bills, gamble and feed her cocaine habit.” The crime took place in Calgary between June 1, 2006 and June, 30 2008. This embezzlement is a classic case of white collar crime and demonstrates numerous criminological theories.
Debra became the assistant vice-president and manager of energy lending of a Canadian Western Bank on January 31, 2006. Within a month Debra set up her embezzlement scam by creating two corporations that the embezzled funds would be funnelled too. Debra set up an account in a woman’s name using the woman’s GIC (guaranteed investment certificate) which was worth 8 million dollars. Debra started with 100,000 dollars in a line of credit using the woman’s name and increased it 6 times until the line of credit reached $950,0000 on November 6, 2007. Additionally, Debra arranged for 5 new accounts in the same woman’s name with a total deposit of $16.4 million. Debra made 72 unauthorized withdrawals from the fake account in the two year time frame of the scam. She kept the scam going by transferring money from the

matured GIC account into the fake account’s line of credit to make it seem real. Debra also forged the woman’s name, signature, and email. Debra’s embezzlement scam lasted until June 30, 2008. Debra abused the trust of customers and her employer, Canadian Western Bank, in order to gain financial wealth. Debra had a cocaine and gambling problem so some of the money that she embezzled undoubtedly fuelled her addictions. Debra also used the ill gotten money to buy trucks, pay her credit cards, and pay her bills. In conclusion, Debra’s embezzlement negatively affected fellow co-workers, members of the public, and herself.
The crown prosecutor, Shelley Smith, was seeking a prison term of 4 to 5 years. On the other hand, the defence lawyer, Geoff Ellwand, was seeking the minimum federal time of up to two and a half years. Firstly, the judge said that Debra’s abuse of the position of trust was an aggravating factor. Secondly, the judge, Ken Macleod, also said that cocaine and gambling addictions were not mitigating factors. Thirdly, Debra’s crime affected numerous other individuals working at the bank and members of the public. Ultimately, the provincial court judge, Ken Macleod, sentenced Debra to three years and nine months to a prison for defrauding her employers.
Shelley Smith argued in court that criminals shouldn’t profit from their crimes and was seeking a high compensation order. However, the defence lawyer, Geoff Ellwand, argued that the compensation order was unrealistic and was seeking a $1000 monthly payment which would be hard to pay but not impossible. Ultimately, the judge ordered Debra Anne Chapin to pay a restitution of $1,750,00. The judge acknowledged the fact that Debra wouldn’t be able to pay back the money, but thought that it was important to not send a message that crime pays to anyone paying attention to the case or contemplating fraud.
The article makes the assumption that cocaine and gambling problems contributed to the cause of the crime. The defence lawyer tried to make the same argument by arguing that Debra’s cocaine and gambling addiction were mitigating factors. However, the defence lawyer failed in his argument because the judge did not consider Debra’s cocaine and gambling problems as mitigating factors.
There are numerous criminology theories that could contribute to the understanding of this crime; however, I will be analyzing the top two theories that are relevant to this case. Firstly, the rational choice theory applies to Debra’s crime and will help contribute to the understanding of the crime. Secondly, the deterrence theory applies to Debra’s crime and will help contribute to the understanding of the news article tremendously. In conclusion, I believe that these two theories will help me accurately analyze the news article.
The rational choice theory contributes greatly to the understanding of this white collar crime.

Debra’s crime is a perfect example of the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory is best defined as when an individual rationally decides to commit a crime. The individual’s decision to commit a crime or not is based on the potential gains and potential losses. Debra embezzled nearly 2 million dollars so she most likely decided to commit the crime based on potential gains. In addition, Debra must have known that her chances of getting caught would be slim. Since she was smart enough to commit such a crime, she most likely funnelled the money to an offshore

account.
There are numerous advantages to using the rational choice theory in reference to the event. Firstly, the rational choice theory helps describe why Debra committed the crime. Secondly, the rational choice theory fits the crime committed because she undoubtedly embezzled 2 million dollars with thought on what the possible gains and losses would be. According to Shover, Hochstetler, and Pontell (2007), “Rational choice theorizing, which essentially is a modernization of the utilitarian concepts of the Classical School of criminology, has been increasingly applied to understanding common crimes that are committed overwhelmingly by poor and minority populations. Shover and Hochstetler effectively (and logically) argue that privileged criminals should be seen as no less voluntaristic or blameless in their actions” (p. 369-370). Therefore, white collar criminals are essentially the same as street criminals; in that, white collar and street criminals both usually decide to commit crimes based on a rational decision.
There are numerous disadvantages to using the rational choice theory in reference to the event. Firstly, Debra might have not rationally decided to commit the crime because she had a gambling and cocaine problem; consequently, it is likely that Debra might have been under the influence when she decided to commit the crime. If Debra was under the influence when she decided to commit the crime, the crime would fit the psychopharmacology theory better than the rational choice theory. The psychopharmacology theory is the scientific study of the effect of drugs on behaviour. According to Harlow (1991), “Responding to other questions about their drug-use histories, more than a quarter of all convicted jail inmates said they were under the Influence of drugs at the time of the crime” (p. 1). Secondly, the rational choice theory assumes people act in their self interest; however, she probably wasn’t doing bad financially since she was a manager at a known bank so rationally speaking it wasn’t a very good decision for her. In conclusion, I believe that the risk of her getting caught was high since she funnelled money out of the women’s GIC account, which the women would have eventually noticed.
The second theory that contributes greatly to the understanding of this article is the deterrence theory. The deterrence theory is best defined as when a person guilty of a crime is punished severely enough so that others and the same person will not commit the same crime. The deterrence theory was used by the judge during the trial because the judge ordered Debra to pay a restitution of $1,750,00. The judge took into consideration that Debra wouldn’t be able to pay back the large amount of money ordered, but thought that it was important to not send a message that crime pays to anyone that was contemplating fraud.
There are numerous advantages to using the deterrence theory in reference to the crime that I am analyzing. Firstly, the deterrence theory fits perfectly with how the judge ordered such a high restitution amount even though he had an idea that she would not pay back the amount ordered. Secondly, it’s important to deter other people from thinking about committing such crimes because people often choose to commit a crime rationally so it is best to combat it with deterrence. According to Martinez (2014), “Those who engage in elite-level criminal activities frequently have the resources to procure high-end prosecution of these criminals, (Friedrichs, 2009, p.309-343) many are given very lenient punishments and some go without appropriate consequences” (p. 6-7). Therefore, we should be doing our best to keep white collar crime low because it affects our environment, the general public, and our daily jobs.
There are numerous disadvantages to using the deterrence theory in reference to the crime that I am analyzing. Firstly, the judge may have ordered Debra to pay too high of a restitution; subsequently, it might not be possible for her to pay back such a high amount of money. Secondly, the deterrence theory does not seem to be working in relation to white collar crime because the benefits of gaining huge sums of money and funnelling it to an offshore account outweigh the couple of years spent in prison.
White collar crime definitely should be addressed with the proper policy implementations. White collar criminals commit crimes usually because of the rational choice theory. Rationally speaking, it pays to commit white collar crime. According to Friedrichs (1996), “Evidence cited elsewhere in this book strongly suggests that in most cases the risk strongly favours the offender because the probability of detection, prosecution, and sanctioning is typically low” (p. 11). There are three excellent policies that should be implemented to lower white collar crime in our society. The first policy that needs to implemented to lower white collar crime is a better deterrence factor; for instance, we need to implement longer prison times and higher restitution orders while making sure that the restitution order is met before the offender is granted parole. Secondly, the best way to combat white collar crime is to be more active in the search for white collar criminals. We can be more active in the search for white collar criminals by expanding our white collar division in the RCMP. The third best way to combat white collar crime is to be more aware of white collar crimes. We can best make the public aware of the white collar crimes by representing white collar crime in the news equally as street crime. In conclusion, white collar crime is a major problem in our society that often goes unpunished; therefore, we should be doing more to prevent and punish such crimes to the full extent of the law.