An employee who stole more than $100,000 from a real estate company narrowly escaped jail when she appeared in court.

Karla Elizabeth Trott, 40, was sentenced at Supreme Court for seven counts of stealing and two of theft. Trott, of Sandys, pleaded guilty at an earlier court appearance to obtaining $108,985.86 from Bermuda Realty Company Ltd (BRCL). The court heard she stole the money over a four-year period and was only caught out in May 2006 when she went on sick leave.

Trott stole cash on 129 occasions and also wrote herself nine cheques, one of which was deposited in her six-year-old daughter's bank account.

Puisne Justice Charles Etta-Simmons said cases of female employees stealing large amounts of money were on the rise in Bermuda. "We have a lot of women coming before the court for dishonesty offences of stealing from their employers," she said.

Mrs. Justice Simmons said the defence of having children to look after was not an excuse to avoid custody. "It looks as though the scales of justice are not being held evenly for men, who in some circumstances can't say they are the primary caregivers," she said. "The court has to be concerned that offenders or people who may have the opportunity to steal from an employer may think 'the fact that I have children will save myself from going to prison'."

On hearing that Trott has a child who is still breast-feeding and is also currently working two part-time jobs however, Mrs. Justice Simmons gave her a year's suspended sentence. The judge also took into account her early guilty plea and the fact she has no previous convictions.

Crown Counsel Cindy Clarke told the court Trott worked as an accounts administrator in the property services division of BRCL, which manages rental commercial and residential properties.

She occupied that position since January 2001 and managed 15 condominium property accounts. The court heard Trott started stealing money in February 2004 from six accounts — York House, Convict Bay, Main Royal Ltd., Farm Lane Mews Management, Roxdene and Grosvenor.

In May 2006, prior to going on sick leave she completed the York House quarterly financial statements, showing "a healthy cash balance". On reviewing the account however, the Systems Controller noticed a $65,000 deficit.

Trott, who was known as Karla Smith at the time, made cheque payments to herself, but falsely recorded amounts in the cheque ledger as property expenses. She also took cash payments from clients, crediting them on the electronic ledger but not depositing them into the property bank accounts. To disguise the loss, cheques were written between the condominium accounts which she managed.

On being found out and questioned by a manager, she admitted stealing from the York House account and several others. The court heard her salary at the time was $65,000 and she earned another $17,000 through overtime. Ms Clarke said: "She abused the trust and confidence imposed on her by her colleagues and superiors."

Reading out a Victim Impact Statement, Ms Clarke said not only had BRCL lost $108,985.86 but had to pay additional expenses to review all of Trott's property accounts in order "to ensure all client monies were accounted for".

The cost of preparing documents for Crown prosecution cost another $12,500, while "public relations also suffered, as many clients had to be informed". This led to one client with an annual income to BRCL of $24,000 withdrawing the company's services.

Ms Clarke said staff morale was also affected, particularly as remaining staff had to cover Trott's workload after she was fired. In the statement, BRCL said: "She was a trusted integral member of our company. Our staff are our greatest asset. That ideal was shattered for a time. She took advantage of all the good opportunities, while at the same time exploiting her position by stealing."

Defence lawyer Victoria Pearman said Trott took the money to cover her rent as her boyfriend was failing to pay his way. "This man did not come through with his share of the expenses, which put her in financial difficulty and that is one reason why she took the money," said Ms Pearman.

Explaining that Trott had no immediate family, she said: "She grasped at him even though she was drowning. "This was not a case of Ms Trott going on a giant spree, going travelling, getting her nails done and hairdos and the like."

On being found out, Ms Pearman said Trott tried to rectify the situation. "She brought to their (BRCL's) attention the accounts which had discrepancies and attempted notwithstanding the firing, to assist as much as possible," she said.

On Friday, the court heard Trott had two daughters, aged nine and one year and 11 months. "The only person she has to look after her children is her ex-husband and his wife," said Ms Pearman.

In a statement to the court, Trott said her boyfriend was a drug addict but she did not initially notice the signs, thinking instead he had a gambling problem.

"Never in my wildest dreams did I think he was an addict," she said. "I was struggling not managing with my bills and rent in a compact apartment. My salary was not enough to cover all the expenses."

She said: "I know I violated the trust of Coldwell Banker and for that I am extremely sorry. I also violated myself.

"I take full responsibility and I am truly sorry. But my children need me and I need them. I ask for leniency, not for me but for my girls. I lead a different life now, God is my saviour and I strive every day to be a better person. I committed a bad act but I am a good person and can still be a positive person in the community. I have a lot to offer."

Trott said she was now considering becoming a substance abuse counsellor. "Once again I am truly sorry to Coldwell Banker, and to my family, my friends and especially my daughters," she said.

Sentencing Trott to one year in custody, suspended for two years, Mrs. Justice Simmons said: "The court has noted a rise in the number of cases involving dishonesty, particularly those with pecuniary losses for employers. In the light of this the court has to take into account the deterrent factor in sentencing."

She added: "The court must however also take into consideration your former unblemished record and the fact you will have difficulty — if at all — of finding employment at the same level as at the company in this case.

"The most compelling issue for the court to consider however, is you have two young children, one of whom is not yet weaned.

"The community is better served by your finding employment and looking after your two young children," said Mrs. Justice Simmons.