April 6, 2025 • Posted In White Collar Crime
Common defenses against embezzlement charges in Georgia often depend on the facts and how the case was built. You may be able to argue lack of intent, permission to use the property, or that someone else had access. Because embezzlement is considered a theft crime, prosecutors must prove both intent and unlawful control over someone else’s property.
One of the most important things prosecutors have to prove in an embezzlement case is intent. In Georgia, embezzlement is considered a form of white collar crime, which means it involves deliberate acts like converting someone else’s money for personal use.
If there was no intent to steal or defraud, that charge may not hold up. Courts often look at whether the actions were accidental, misunderstood, or part of a legitimate transaction that was poorly documented.
In situations where a person had access to funds but believed they were using them appropriately, or if the records were informal or disorganized, the question of intent becomes a lot harder to answer. That gap can form the basis for a strong defense, especially in business settings where the lines between personal and company finances are sometimes blurred.
In embezzlement cases, the prosecution has to prove more than just what you did. They also have to show who the property belonged to and how much it was worth. If they cannot clearly prove either of those things, the charges may not stick. Under O.C.G.A. § 16-8-4, penalties for embezzlement, or theft by conversion, are tied to the value of the property allegedly taken.
That means even if the accusation is serious, the charge could be reduced if the amount is unclear or disputed. In cases involving bank fraud or business accounts, confusion over access and ownership is more common than people realize.
The amount of money or property in question plays a big role in whether an embezzlement charge is treated as a felony or misdemeanor. If the value is below a certain threshold, the charge may be reduced, which also lowers the possible penalties. That is why prosecutors often focus heavily on how much was allegedly taken and whether they can back it up with records.
In many cases, the value of the property is not as straightforward as it sounds. There may be different accounting methods, third-party appraisals, or gaps in documentation that make it harder to reach a clear number. If the amount cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that weakness may be enough to reduce or challenge the charge.
In some cases, the person accused of embezzlement had permission to access the funds, or at least believed they did. If someone was given access through their job, a business partnership, or a past arrangement, that can form the basis for a defense. The issue often comes down to whether the use of the funds was clearly outside the scope of that permission.
Emails, contracts, HR policies, or even casual instructions from a supervisor can make a difference. If the accused thought they were allowed to move or use the funds and acted without criminal intent, the case gets harder to prove. Courts want to see clear boundaries and violations. When those boundaries are fuzzy or unclear, the defense has more room to work towards a positive outcome.
