By Paul Daquilante • Staff Writer • 

Theft charged in bank heist

Only online subscribers may access this article. Subscribe online by clicking here. Already a subscriber, please .



Are you kidding me????? She walked into a bank, and point blank robbed it. Yes, no weapon, possibly no open threat to the teller, but come on! SHE WAS TWICE THE SIZE OF THE TELLER....that is threat enough. ONLY charged with a misdemeanor charge???? Huh, that is SURE to teach her a lesson as she ponders doing it again.....UH FREAKING MAZING! This woman knew what she was doing was wrong, and no matter how down and out you are....YOU DO NOT ROB A BANK!!!!!!! But now, because she walked into the bank and did not try to conceal her identity, she is going to get away with it...amazing. This county never ceases to amaze me...I guess my ballot will be getting a write in for DA, and I am pretty sure that Mickey Mouse will be pretty equal to the incumbent. amazing.


Wow, holler all you want but the DA did the right thing. That's the law, like it or not.
She also didn't get away with it. Her face is plastered all over the county, will most likely lose her job and will probably still be facing some jail time or fines.

Not sure if she thought it out that well but she did dodge a huge bullet. I do find it interesting though that she's well dressed, well fed, and gainfully employed. How does that qualify as falling on hard times?


NO!! They are not really kidding. Isn't it amazing what this county is coming to! I have personally been dealing with the courts regarding a theft that occured against me and as the victim you have to work very hard and keep on your toes at all times to make sure you are aware of what is going on at all times. I have learned alot lately and what they are teaching everyone is that it is ok to commit these crimes as there is not very harsh consequences. A few days behind bars at the tax payers expense as well as a court appointed attorney at the tax payers expense!! WHO HELPS THE VICTIM because the DA's office sure does'nt!!


That's the law? You are kidding right? Going into the bank and asking for money is not against the law, as long as you withdrawing it from your guess is that she did not do that. Going into a bank and robbing them .....taking money that is not a crime. A MAJOR warrants more than a slap on the wrist. She SHOUL lose her job, her face SHOULD be plastered everywhere, and she most likely wont spend any more time in jail than she will spend waiting for her plea deal. This is ridiculous...and if it is the law that she is being charged with a minor crime....the law needs to be changed. It amazes me that people are actually defending this criminal behavior. I am completely in awe of the obvious lack of morals and values that people are displaying these days.


Holy Hell, are you kidding me?? I am speechless. This is flat out WRONG.
When is the election for district attorney? Time to hire us a new one. We the people deserve better.
Please tell me this article is just a joke or a prank or something...


Well Mr Crabtree, I'm glad the citizen involvement on this one was pretty amazing. Not sure it will be so amazing in the future when people learn that this is nothing more than a simple little class A misdemeanor. I am stunned!

troy prouty

Looks like she got a break.

Let's hope she makes good on it and doesn't re-offend.

Personally, I'm more concerned in stopping bad behavior than punishment.

Troy Prouty*


"prosecutors have to prove use of force or the threat ". Shouldn't that be up to the victim, the teller? Obviously she felt this robber was a threat and therefore handed over money instead of telling her "no crazy, I am not going to give you money".

What a can of worms you opened.

I recognize that the law is law, however, anyone who demands money is doing so under an unsaid threat. It is history, and knowledge that tells us that one who goes to such drastic actions is dangerous, therefore a THREAT.

By that obvious train of thought she should be given more than a spank.


By this theory, anyone, listen up criminals, anyone can go and ask for money from a bank. It's not stealing at all, they gave it to her.

It's the banks fault, not hers, she was just asking for money. She should make a claim for her character being slammed in the media, she should press charges against the sheriffs office, bank, news outlets, everything, after all she just ASKED for the money.



".Shouldn't that be up to the victim, the teller?"

I'll ask the girls tomorrow.

Jeb Bladine

Oregon law on Robbery is very specific: First degree (class A felony) requires that one be armed with a deadly weapon, or cause or attempt to cause serious injury; second degree (class B felony) is when one claims to be armed with a deadly weapon, or is helped by a second person who is present; third degree (class C felony) requires that one uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force with the intent to squash resistance to the theft.

The DA, in this case, determined that none of those conditions existed. Would you have the DA pursue prosecution based on the actual law, or on what you think the law should be?

Having said that, it's fair to ask the DA's Office about the charge of burglary in the second degree, which is committed when one �enters or remains unlawfully in a building with intent to commit a crime therein.� It is a class C felony, subject to a maximum of 5 years in prison and $125,000 fine.

Theft 2, charge in this case, is a class A misdemeanor, subject to a maximum of 1 year in jail and $6,250 fine.

Jeb Bladine


I emplore all of you to buy an Oregon ordinance and law book. It will save you the hassle of sounding ignorant and will help you understand the laws (which are voted on) just a littler better. They are actually saving the county a lot of money as well.


ThatGuy, Just curious, how many languages is that book printed in?

troy prouty

posted " (which are voted on)"

But not always by the majority of the people of the State I might add, and not always with the best intentions, some go to the highest payer in order to obtain the votes needed regardless if the majority of the State approves of them or not.

.Welcome to Politics! A life of deception, fraud, and simply put - Corruption.

Thatguy in all his wonder, failed to simply understand that the majority of people that probably responded (yet not all) probably didn't have all the details of the situation to fully understand everything about the Theft/Robbery, and many posters respond on emotion mind. Not always the best for thinking your way through things.

That being said - laws have different meanings - hince charges - it depends on three factors - how is it presented, who is defending and presenting that side and who is the hearing it (judging it).

For example:

I've seee innocent people convicted (right, Tichenor (former prosecutor?), so you can't say that charging is everything when it comes to conviction (or that wouldn't happen) I've seen guilty people found innocent for that matter as well. I promise you - that who is presenting it, who is defending it and who is judging both sides is actually just as inportant as the charge, if not more. A good prosecutor and poor defense can make a jay walker be Charles Manson.. And how you present Charles might be more important than the crime itself on the conviction.

That being said - Like I said I like to personally focus on a change in behavior - is this going to happen again? It would make more sense when looking at charging somebody on how much effort etc.. you might want to put into it.

Ont he other side - you are taught in law to never ask if the person committed the crime they are accused of. Instead you ask - what can the other side prove.

Troy Prouty*


They need the cells for them nasty pot smokers, y'know.


Wow- Let's See Just trying to get home from Sheridan - 18 Busi route- Driving past car wash - STOP STOP STOP - Law Enforcement Every where Coming Going - right left Straight Ahead - down the street's WHAT THE HELL - Wait for them to let you Pass -HUM - ??????? BANK MUST OF BEEN ROBBED - Crapp School just got out Did'nt it ?????????? - Went to grocery store - All where talking about BANK ROBBERY - BY A WOMAN ???????????? - Was she Armed is the Local Teller's OK ????? - No one Knew ????????? - Read article's in this posted paper - BREAKING NEW'S - Comment's from family - Comment's from Other's - Rumor's She Worked @ the Casino PROVEN - She is A Tribal member Nothing Mentioned YET - Rumor's Suck - AND SOOOOOOOOOOOOO DOES THIS -


ThatGuy and Jed, rules are rules- I understand that. What I am suggesting is it should be up to the victim to decide whether or not she felt like she was in danger? Based on our knowledge of previous bank robberies, is it unfair for the teller to believe that she may be in danger as well as anyone else in the bank? Based on previous bank robberies is it unfair to for the teller to fear that the offender could have a weapon hidden, and be ready to use it, as it is a desperate act? Is it now up to our tellers to demand proof that a bank robber is really a threat? Should they demand to see any weapons, demand a name so they can run it through a background check while the robber waits for his/her booty? It should come down to intent, and when a person enters a bank with ill intent, they should be subjected to fair penalties and not let off on some other ridiculous charge. It is impossible for those in the bank to know whether or not the robber is going to do something drastic, and regardless whether they got $420.00 or $400,000 the intent was the same, 'to scare someone enough with the threat of possible bodily harm to gain something that was not theirs.' That alone should be enough for the DA to come in much harsher. It is NOT the banks responsibility to prove that she was not really a threat; her actions PROVED FOR HER that she was. So, yes, the law should be changed. It's like the question "when is a person officially detained by police?" When they feel like they are. When that person feels like they are having the right to freedom denied is when they are being detained- EVEN if the police do not feel the same. When does a simple theft turn into a robbery, when the victim feels they have no choice but to comply due to fear of retaliation. Whether its bank policy to hand over the money or it was the tellers decision doesn't matter, policies were put into place based on past history and the teller may have handed it over in fear.


Troy, is it going to happen again? No one can ever know, as her "friends and family were very shocked that she would do this."

Even if she doesn't, what about all the others following this? Our DA has just made it very clear that it is open season on our banks. The DA just stated that as long as you walk in to a bank, ask for the money and compliance, without a second party or a SHOWN weapon, he will just bend you over and give you a light spank, not too hard so it wouldn't leave marks.

His decision to handle this case as if it was all just a BIG misunderstanding is leaving a mark, a mark on our communities that puts a huge target on every single bank within our county.

And what is the difference between bank robbery and just a small little theft? One HUGE law suit aimed at every agency involved. Between police, media, newspapers, and word of mouth, this woman was labeled "a bank robber". But now the DA states she is NOT a bank robber, she just asked for the money, and the bank complied and then decided they wanted it back. If her and her family can't figure out how to get a few hundred thousand from all of this I would be shocked.

Oh well, every action has a reaction- and the poor reaction to her actions has the potential to do a lot of harm. Lets hope other robbers- ooops slip of the fingers, lets hope other thieves don't catch on.


What you all are failing to see it that the courts here are not only in the justice system they are also in the "lets make a deal" world. This lady does have a job, but was probably offered to be represented by a court appointed attorney..well, that means she does not have money to pay for attorney, and we all know there is no money generated from that...BUT I am guessing if she could afford her own private counsel they would have prosecuted and gone further with the case..I have seen it happen many time..CRIMINALS remember this..if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you, and since the money will have to be paid pretty much by the courts and case will almost always be down charged to a misdemeanor to save us all money and time. This is my opinion. I have seen it ALOT. You work to make money..they feel you are guilty until proven innocent and they will break the bank making you prove it. If you think I am wrong..what other explaination do you think there is for this bank robber who was smug enough to smile at camera and know look at the slap on wrist. Just saying..Karma


Karma- I have sat in on various court sessions, and there were times my jaw literally dropped because the judge was extremely lenient on someone who I would have nailed to a wall. A repeat offender for DUII- time served, a sex offender who had his hands all over a child- jury says- not guilty, an abuser who beat his GF repeatedly would be put in jail for a short stay and released to go back and do it all over again, again, and again.

Her intent should be enough to keep her in orange for much more than a year, that smile should get her another.

Web Design & Web Development by LVSYS