A FOOTBALL charity manager was dubbed "a mini Imelda Marcos" after she siphoned off a fortune to bankroll her lavish spending sprees.
Anne Stephenson stole up to £200 a day for nearly 14 years and used the cash to buy shoes, clothes, jewellery and furniture.
"Her attitude seemed to be spend, spend, spend and she was clearly buying expensive things just for the sake of it," said one detective.
Police inquiries revealed that in one year 46-year-old Stephenson, who earned a reputation for charitable work, had only withdrawn £150 from her own bank account .
Manchester Crown Court heard that when detectives went to her £377,000 house they discovered an Aladdin's Cave of goods she had been buying with money stolen from the Manchester-based Footballers' Further Education and Vocational Training Society.
Nearly 60 pairs of shoes bought from high-class shops in the centre of the city were found in one wardrobe. There were numerous other pairs of shoes in other wardrobes together with jewellery stacked up in plastic baskets. Clothes, some still with the price tag attached, were also discovered at the house, which is built on three levels and overlooks a lake.
Police said the haul was reminiscent of the massive collection of shoes amassed by the wife of the former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos who was deposed in 1986.
Mini version
"She was like a mini version of Imelda Marcos," said Det Sgt Adrian Ladkin of the Commercial Fraud Unit.
Stephenson, of Lamb Hall Road, Huddersfield, is starting a 30-month jail term after admitting stealing £150,000 from the charity.
She was ordered to repay £136,000 in realisable assets within nine months or serve an extra two and a half years.
Judge Anthony Gee told her: "It is always sad to see someone like you in the dock. You have never been in trouble before but the offences are so serious and involve a grave breach of trust that only a custodial sentence can be justified."
Neil Fryman, prosecuting, said the offences were committed while Stephenson worked as the charity's office manager. The society was formed in 1979 as a registered charity and was jointly set up and financed by the Professional Footballers Association, the FA, the Premier and Football League.
The charity's aim was to provide grants to players forced to quit through injury and other players coming to the end of their careers.
Between 1989 and 2003 Stephenson took cash on almost a daily basis. She was found out when the charity brought in an expert to computerise the accounts.
Jeremy Hill-Baker, defending, said Stephenson never had any formal training and was under an ever-increasing workload. He said: "She is shocked at the figures in the case. It was only small but regular amounts and she had no concept of the total."
The charity said: "The sentence wasn't entirely unexpected, but the trustees' main concern has always been the full recovery of the charity's money, which would have been preferable to seeing Anne go to prison."
Comments
Login or Register to comment
A theif is a theif and needs to be dealt with accordingly.
PS, if there are any plans to car boot sale her haul - let me know where it is.
As I woman, I'd like to know how soon it will be before her solicitors are using the old 'she couldn't help it, it was a hormonal imbalance'?
She should've got double with it being a charity!
The story said B#200 A DAY over 14 years????? Probably should have meant a week. Well thats ok then! Why should she get let off with 2 years if she coughs up B#136k, all she has to do is sell her B#333k house. She should get a sentence to justify the crime-at least 5 years.
Get real MEN how can you even BEGIN to compare her to Imelda Marcos? The Marcos's siphoned BILLIONS from their term in office. 150,000 quid hardly scratches the surface. Not exactly stealing from the poor. Too stiff a jail term considering what child molesters get in the UK. Your system of justice in the UK is severely flawed.
Quite rightly this story has sparked outrage as fraud of any kind, epecially of charity funds is despicable - but those with out sin....
In addition we do not know the personal details of this story (only what the press allow us to read), nor can we appreciate the impact that this will have on this womans family and friends who were unaware this was happening. It is very easy to cast the first stone, but without the full facts we should reserve from judging too harshly. To compare this lady to Imelda Marcos is indeed folly - look up your history books! And to demand a harsher sentence when rapists, child molestors, paedophiles and murderers are in and out of jail faster that you can blink is a disgrace. Let's hope this woman gets the help she needs and support from her family and friends.
I agree that it must be difficult for the people who know her to come to terms with this, and that is too easy to judge someone without knowing the actual facts of the situation. I think that the punishment is just because she was in a position of trust, but we should ask why she did it. I dont agree with the "hormonal imbalance" comment but i think she should get the help and support needed to deal with the root of her problems that lead her to do such a thing.
I've known Anne for a number of years, though I'm more an aquaintance than a friend. I imagine that the loss of her reputation will be harder to bear than a prison term and can see no advantage to anyone in increasing her sentence beyond 30 months.
While I agree a thief is a thief - I have to say to the person that pointed out the B#200 a day error- don't beleive everything you read in the papers.
As the owner of an averagely priced house in todays market I suspect the money didn't go to fund the house - which is an all the more worrying indication of underlying problems that the money appers to be so fritted away - possibly an indication of pressures of modern society?
Again a thief is a thief but I do think for a moment of just how long 2.5 years is - especially when killers of one kind or another often get similair
I do believe that the loss of her reputation will be the hardest thing for Anne to bear. It's a terrible shame that it happened at all. I can only imagine that, after such a long period of time, she's relieved that it's all out in the open. I feel very sorry for her.
The charity will get as much money back as it can, and I know it got an awful lot of work out of Anne over and above standard work hours. They'll come out ahead in real terms. After all the pressure put on Anne, and all the very long hours she's worked, it just means that we really need far more help and protection for vulnerable workers in this country.