Ceclie Queena B.

Delfino
BABA4A
Management Consultancy Case Study

I. Background of the Study

St. Anthonys Hall is a hall full of deep secrets that even its fraternity members are not aware of,
only the ones with high positions. Its Alpha chapter, the very first St. Anthony Hall, was founded
at Columbia University on January 17, 1847, the feast day of St. Anthony. It began as a true fraternity
dedicated to the love of education and the well being of its members. Back then, it was club founded
for the rich, and well-read elite of the university in New York. Walter Perry was the former alumni
president of the esteemed elite society who was arrested in 2011 for grand larceny or theft of property.
He had spent 30 years affiliated with the victim organization and was then sentenced to to two to six
years of imprisonment. He allegedly stole $650,000 from St. Anthony Hall by self-signed checks,
denied to confess and pleaded not guilty.

II. Statement of the Problem

Walter Perry refuses to plead guilty as he claims that all those checks were disbursed for a good
reason but the book of records has gone missing and the person who can attest to it is dead.

III. Alternative Decisions

1. Negotiation - it is coming to a mutual agreement without involving a third-party neutral

decision maker. In this case, I believe that there was an underlying issue involved as Walter Perry has
a puritanical streak which can be a little too strict for many people. When looking at him, one
cannot associate him with being a thief. Negotiation is usually a simpler, cheaper, and quicker way to
settle issues.

2. Mediation - it is securing the services of a neutral third-party decision maker who will work
with the parties involved in the case to come to a mutual binding agreement. This usually do not
involve lawyers and increase the pressure to help each side to build a strong case. The weaker case is
easily spotted as they are placed to face each other with all the facts. Without the court, the weaker
party, can offer settlements in order to avoid a lawsuit.

3. Arbitration - its difference from mediation is that the neutral third party does not work with
either parties. Rather, he listens to both and comes up with his own decision as to which has fault. The
Arbitrator has the authority to determine a legally binding agreement.

4. Trial or Lawsuit - it is a case brought to the court of law. This is the last resort if both parties
can no longer come to mutual decision. This usually includes lawyers, judges, jury and other legal
requirements.

IV. Theoretical Framework

Larceny is the taking of another persons personal, physical propertyeven temporarily from
their custody without trespassing. Grand larceny is typically defined as larceny of a more significant
amount of property. In the US, it is often defined as an amount valued at $400 or more. In New York,
grand larceny refers to amounts of $1,000 or more. Grand larceny is often classified as a felony with
the concomitant possibility of a harsher sentence.

Like any case, there are steps on how to arrest a person who committed a crime. For Grand
Larceny, there are usually six steps.
 1. Investigation - When a complaint is filed at the Police Station or a lawyer, the police have to
confirm its authenticity and find a Probable Cause to give the judge a reason to issue a search
warrant.

2. Search Warrant - If investigating officers believe that there's evidence of a crime pointing at a
particular location, they may try to get a search warrant allowing them to search the premises. A judge
reviews the information submitted by the police and decides whether there is "probable cause" to
support it. Probable cause means that an officer has presented adequate facts to support a belief that
there is evidence of a crime at the location described in the warrant.

3. Arrest - Police can make an arrest under the following conditions:

If law enforcement officers have probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed
and that a specific person has committed the crime, they may arrest the person under
suspicion, taking them into custody. Officers may need to obtain a warrant before taking a
suspect into custody.
If a person commits a felony or misdemeanor crime in the presence of a law enforcement
officer, the officer may arrest the person without a warrant.
If an officer has probable cause to believe that a person has committed a felony crime, even if
the crime was not committed in the officer's presence, the officer may arrest the person.
3. Bail - Bail is money or property that an accused person puts forth as security, to make sure
they'll show up for further criminal proceedings, including the trial and sentencing. In serious cases,
the detained person can be denied bail especially if he is under suspicion of fleeing the jurisdiction.

4. Trial - One has the right to Jury Trial if he was given a sentence of more than 6 months in the
pre-trial facing a judge. In the Jury Trial, lawyers largely influence the decision of both the judge and
the jury.

5. The Verdict - A jury may find a person guilty of all, some, or none of the crimes
charged. In some cases, depending on the evidence presented and the nature of the
instructions given by the court to the jury, a jury may convict a defendant of a lesser
crime than that charged in the indictment.

If the verdict is guilty, the defendant may have a right to appeal if error has been committed in
the process of obtaining a conviction.
If the verdict is not guilty, the court or the prosecutors cannot overturn the jury's verdict.
The decision of the Jurors may take a minute, hours, days or weeks. They deliberate in secret and
discuss among themselves their verdict.
6. Appeal - if the Jury decided that the defendant is guilty, he has the right to appeal although it
will be allowed within a limited amount of time.

V. Chosen Decision

Because of the lack of sufficient information about the case, it is difficult to make a decision.
Maybe because St. Anthony Hall values secrecy more than anything, facts of this case, the underlying
cause and the issues beneath, are all hidden from the public. But as a person who read the Vanity Fair
article, which in itself didnt reveal anything conclusive, I choose to go to trial. Grand Larceny is a big
crime. As soon as the audit team were refused by Walter Perry, there should have been stronger
member vigilance regarding the elite societys finances. Those self-addressed checks are evidence that
is incriminating enough to send him to jail. Without the reconciling book of records, everything went
from fishy to total chaos.

Also, the article never mentioned any audit team finding any lost money. They only wrote about
Perrys countless reconciling spreadsheets proving his own innocence. According to the defendant,
stealing money worth $650,000 would cause bankruptcy to St. Anthonys Hall as the expenses are just
enough to be covered by its receipts. The lost reconciling records may not even be lost but rather
nonexistent. Boly, the only person who understands the deepest secrets of the hall, is also dead. Some
of the checks were written during his administration and he may be able to answer to some. I trust that
when the case was brought to the court, there is sufficient evidence causing the jurors to believe he
was guilty. Therefore, bringing this case to the court is my final decision as the court brings to light
every detail relevant to the case.

Sources:
1. http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/the-criminal-justice-process.html
2. http://theftdefenseattorney.com/larceny-law-resource/stages-of-a-larceny-case/
3. http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/criminal-law/white_collar_crimes/larceny.htm
4. http://www.security-faqs.com/5-types-of-cash-larceny-and-how-to-prevent-them.html
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larceny