Rosie was the bookkeeper for TotalRecall Inc. To pay a gambling debt, Rosie took $5,000 in cash that was to be deposited in TotalRecall’s bank account. Rosie then altered TotalRecall’s accounting records to hide her actions. Which statement is correct?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Embezzlement is a criminal offense that occurs when a person who is entrusted with another’s property fraudulently converts it to personal use. Key legal concepts here are: (1) entrusted possession or fiduciary relationship, (2) appropriation or conversion of funds, (3) intent to deprive the owner, and (4) concealment or fraudulent records to hide the taking.

Step-by-step reasoning:
1. Entrustment: Rosie was the bookkeeper for TotalRecall and had access to company cash intended for deposit. That establishes custody/entrustment of the funds.  
2. Conversion/appropriation: Rosie took $5,000 in cash and used it to pay her gambling debt. That is a personal appropriation of company property.  
3. Criminal intent and concealment: Rosie altered TotalRecall’s accounting records to hide her actions. The deliberate falsification of records demonstrates intent to deceive and to permanently deprive the company of the funds.  
4. Legal consequence: Those facts satisfy the typical elements of embezzlement (and related offenses such as fraud and falsification of books), making the conduct criminal and subject to prosecution by the government.

Why the correct answer is correct:
Because Rosie, an employee with custody of company funds, intentionally converted the funds for personal use and concealed the act by altering records, the state may prosecute her criminally for embezzlement (and possibly other offenses). Criminal prosecution is initiated by the government; the facts plainly support such a prosecution.

Why the other options are incorrect:
- “Rosie committed no crime.” Incorrect — the taking plus record alteration meets embezzlement elements.  
- “The government can initiate a civil lawsuit to recover the $5,000 for TotalRecall because Rosie’s conduct was criminal.” Incorrect — civil recovery is typically pursued by the private victim (TotalRecall) in a civil suit; the government brings criminal charges, not civil suits on behalf of private companies (though restitution can be ordered in criminal proceedings).  
- “The government can initiate a criminal case against TotalRecall for embezzlement.” Incorrect — embezzlement requires wrongful appropriation by an individual; TotalRecall (the victim) would not be prosecuted for being victimized.

Conclusion: The government can initiate a criminal case against Rosie for embezzlement. This matches the provided answer.

Rosie was the bookkeeper for TotalRecall Inc. To pay a gambling debt, Rosie took $5,000 in cash that was to be deposited in TotalRecall’s bank account. Rosie then altered TotalRecall’s accounting records to hide her actions. Which statement is correct? 单项选择题

类似问题

Which of the following statements is the most accurate:

Bank teller Hugo receives $1,000 from a customer for deposit into the customer's bank account. Instead of placing the money into the customer's account, Hugo puts it into his pocket. Which of the following offenses has he committed?

Desperate for money, John Johnson breaks into a business that is closed for the evening and takes cash from a drawer. Johnson has committed: Blank ______.

True or false – it is a crime under Australian law to advertise or provide contract cheating services to university students?

The standard of proof in a criminal action is

When Lamar’s welfare benefits started, he mistakenly received two checks. Lamar promptly returned one check and cashed the other.

Mistake of fact can be a strong defense to criminal responsibility

With the exception of strict liability crimes, a person cannot unintentionally commit a crime

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单