This week, the strange story of former Santa Cruz County treasurer Liz Guffer reached a surprising conclusion.

Convicted of embezzling tens of millions of dollars of public funds for nearly 10 years, Gutfahr was sentenced to 10 years in prison, followed by three years of probation.

Daisy Zavala Magaña, a reporter for Nogales International, tracked all the twists and turns in this case and took part in the show to discuss it.

Complete conversation

Sam Dinman: Good morning Daisy.

Daisy Zavala Magagna: good morning. how are you?

Dingman: Thank you for doing well and being here.

As I reported in your article about this, Daisy, the judge in the case, said US District Judge Rosemary Marquez cited her as “There is no reason why Guffer stole all this money.” However, Gutfahr’s lawyers tried to convince the court that Gutfahr had her own justification for what she did.

Zavala Magaña: Yes, he did.

Dingman: And what was the justification for them?

Zavala Magaña: So he painted the picture that she is, so except for this embezzlement of $38 million in public funds, she was otherwise an honorable person, and she was misplaced by quotes, quotes, “the delusion that she wanted a luxurious life.” And some personal issues, such as depression and impaired ability, are what he was trying to paint for the court.

Dingman: Okay, can we refresh our memories? What did Gutfer say first when this story broke? Was she always this introspective, at least by her lawyer?

Zavala Magaña: That’s not the case at all. It was our end radio silence, but I can understand that it’s right, I don’t want to talk to the media.

Dingman: Yes.

Zavala Magaña: But what the prosecutors highlighted was that in his first interview with the FBI, she denied that she was actually stolen until 2013. She said it was actually only three months, essentially about $1.5 million in total.

Dingman: The reality is, as you just said, it was 10 years. And it ended up being around $40 million.

Zavala Magaña: Yeah, well, that was originally about $39 million. And as they made the revision, it was reduced to about $38.7 million.

Dingman: Yes.

Zavala Magaña: Around there.

Dingman: There’s a bit of a big gap between these two versions of the story. I think one other thing I found interesting from your work is the name Joshua Hamilton, a lawyer for Gutfahr.

Zavala Magaña: yes.

Dingman: He tried to pin some of the blame for what Gutfar did in Santa Cruz County, right?

Zavala Magaña: Yes, he did. in his sentence memo filed prior to the date of the sentence. However, in court he emphasized that the blame was lying to Gutfer. However, in that memo he emphasized that the county had no surveillance. There is very little monitoring. It is also true that there is a long history of embezzlement scandals and fraudulent scandals.

Dingman: Yes. Yeah, but if I wasn’t wrong, one other thing he said was that she became the treasurer of Santa Cruz County despite the fact that she had no background or training in finance or accounting. That’s definitely funny, but she ran for the office, right? she? She moved her name forward for the position.

Zavala Magaña: She did. And she ran without being opposed and eventually took the position.

Dingman: On the other side of this, there was also a comment from the work from county supervisor Rudy Morera. He said he’s known Gutfahr for 50 years. And I think it’s safe to say that he didn’t really buy these rationalizations because of her actions, right?

Zavala Magaña: Yes, he didn’t. He actually called her because he tried to manipulate the situation again. He said he didn’t believe she had severe depression that affected her behavior, or she didn’t know what was going on.

Dingman: So, in terms of what’s going on, she embezzled this money again for a very long time. Let me remind you of what the mechanic was about how she was able to do this. How could she keep so much money a secret?

Zavala Magaña: Yeah. There she created many LLCs. These are the companies she was leaking money in an attempt to hide it. And she also forged the Treasury reporting, settlement reports and many other mechanisms that would help catch this.

But the other issue with that is that the county is not doing due diligence, is being accused of monitoring and actually reading those reports and checking something.

Dingman: Interesting. Interestingly, I have to say that it sounds quite sophisticated manipulation to someone who has no conceptually a financial or accounting background or training. Was that something the prosecutor pointed out in all of this?

Zavala Magaña: Yeah. The prosecutor and ultimately the judge pointed out as a kind of factor in why she decided to issue the sentence she had.

Dingman: So, speaking of judge, Daisy, this sentence is actually a little higher than what the prosecutors wanted. Why did Judge Marquez increase the severity of the sentence?

Zavala Magaña: She had been debated a bit with schools and tax districts affected by this as to whether they were calling it a substantial financial harm. There was objection to that.

However, the judge ultimately found that these entities were not a whole and thus economic harm was present. And although the school had no money for the children’s renovations, Gutfar lived in a very luxurious life. She had 17 properties. And lots of gorgeous items.

Dingman: Yes. Okay, well, that seems to be the end of a very strange chapter for now.