Doug Walls and Millard Sentenced

Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:20 PM

Former car dealership operator Doug Walls (shown at left) and the company’s former financial officer Mike Millard have been sentenced for defrauding the CIBC for more than $5,000.

The two have each been given conditional sentences of two years less a day. The sentence does not call for either Walls or Millard to make restitution to the bank. It is believed the bank lost more than a million dollars in the cheque kiting scheme.

The fraud happened in1998, in the days before the auto dealership, Fred Walls and Sons of Prince George, collapsed.

The two entered guilty pleas in January of this year.

Walls was a former School District 57 Trustee and was an executive with the Liberal Party. He is related by marriage to Premier Gordon Campbell. That relationship prompted the case to be reviewed by special prosecutor Josiah Wood, and the case was heard by Justice Patrick Dohm.

Shortly after the company’s fauilure, Walls resurfaced with a contract with the provincial government. He, along with the Minister of Children and Families Gordon Hogg, lost their positions over the matter.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, March 08, 2007 12:20 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: More BS on March 8 2007 1:06 PM

"conditional sentences of two years less a day" I guess that means no jail time, after all they're not reeeeeeeeally criminals.....

Posted by: giterdun on March 8 2007 1:15 PM

SO I GUESS CRIME DOESN'T PAY EH!! SNICKER .. SNICKER.

Posted by: thereasonableman on March 8 2007 1:28 PM

Ha ha ha ha ha !
That was a really funny joke. Tell me another one.

And Justass For All.

Posted by: jonnypg on March 8 2007 2:17 PM

You can sure tell we dont live in the good old U.S.A!

Posted by: Harbinger on March 8 2007 2:26 PM

A long roundabout way of "winning" a million bucks in a lottery. If the banks can write that off, I will ask them to write my loan off. Honest!

Posted by: Gofaster on March 8 2007 2:41 PM

Money doesn't talk It Yells!

Posted by: turtleneck on March 8 2007 4:12 PM

These two are the lowest form of life. I know, I worked for them! Crooks!! Total crooks!

Just remember boys, what goes around comes around.

Posted by: camoose on March 8 2007 4:22 PM

The silence is deafening from his good friend Shirley Bond. Let's just hope that this snake comes back in his next life as an 80 something grandmother who likes to protest. Then and only then would he get to serve any hard time. I feel soory for the people who worked for him who got ripped off by him. Hopefully every dog will have his day.

Posted by: camoose on March 8 2007 4:24 PM

I wonder what part of government or Liberal party appointee he is now. Just a thought.

Posted by: snappi on March 8 2007 4:28 PM

Well you know the how the saying goes......its not who ya know...
After all these years thats the best our judicial system could come up with?? What a joke!

Posted by: Ben Meisner on March 8 2007 4:35 PM

In the past few hours we have had three comments which we have had to remove because they are either border line libelous or outright libelous. Please keep your comments to your "opinion" about the sentence of these two men, but you cannot accuse someone or an organization, or a company, or a political party of being involved in this incident without absolute proof.
If you cannot adhere to this simple request we will be forced to remove all comments on the sentencing. That would be unfair to you all.
-Ben Meisner

Posted by: Longnecks1 on March 8 2007 5:13 PM

Just goes to show you...better to rob banks than safe a tree...*LOL*
Maybe they weren't old enough for jail time....Gotta love this country we live in. Well least I'm old enough to remember when it was a free country....
Just can't figure out why I'm not rich and famous....I have grey hair and wear glasses.....Just the wrong realitves I guess.

Posted by: charles on March 8 2007 6:28 PM

What really surprises me in this case is the sentence does not call for either Walls or Millard to make restitution to the bank. Is this normal in this kind of a case?

It seems to me if the banks don't get restitution in these type of cases, they will get the restitution from the rest of their customers with higher interest rates on loans and/ or higher banking fees.

Posted by: spruce_capital on March 8 2007 7:00 PM

Where is that Judge, from down south, that tours the province to preach how fair the justice system is?

Steal some money from one of the Armoured car companies and you're liable to get shot.

Steal from the Bank and us good folks will pay it back with higher service fees & they get a slap on the wrists, and not to mention what the former employees have already paid!

Yippee! Another free ride for the rich and famous.

Posted by: Andyfreeze on March 8 2007 7:54 PM

This really stinks.There has to be an appeal?

Posted by: diplomat on March 8 2007 8:46 PM

I would think that the CIBC is covered by error and omission insurance against losses of that kind. What are the ramifications of getting a conviction and a sentence of two years less a day?

Will this prevent the convicted from holding ever again any position which involves the handling of other peoples money?

One would hope so.

The bank itself, in my view, perhaps failed to practice sufficient due diligence and may carry a large part of the blame for the loss of the funds.

All around, a very sad and disturbing episode.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on March 8 2007 10:23 PM

You mean Doug got away with a million bucks? Why don't the banks ask for it back then? How come Doug gets to keep a million bucks? I must have missed something, or what are you guys talking about? Where's the million bucks?

Posted by: dow7500 on March 8 2007 11:13 PM

It's not who you know, its just the way punishment is handed out in Canada. How many rapists, pedophiles, and murders walk away with no serious punishment? The list is endless. Why would we expect anything different in this case. To all you Harper bashers, this is what a generation of Liberal justice policies has delivered.

Posted by: billposer on March 8 2007 11:58 PM

The judge said that they did not benefit personally from the fraud - they were trying to keep the dealership afloat and the money all went to its creditors. That's probably why restitution was not ordered. There is also the question of whether they have the assets to pay restitution.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on March 9 2007 7:45 AM

So all the yappin' and flappin' about Doug getting a million bucks is just people being silly? HeeHee!

So tell me if I got it, Doug shop lifted the bank to keep his company afloat and it didn't work, sad. I'll have to read the posts again to see if I can figure out what part the people were mad about.

Sounds like that thug that stole from Walmart and tried to kill someone is going to walk also, now that one should get real jail time.

Posted by: Free Enterprise on March 9 2007 8:21 AM

Get your fact first - A quote from a real news source "The Prince George Citizen"

In making the ruling, Dohm noted extensive letters of support for both men and the fact they did not receive any personal gain from the fraud.

The two men were engaged in a cheque-kiting scheme in a failed attempt to save the Fred Walls and Son Ford dealership.

The scheme cost CIBC about $1.5 million and also left many of the 70 employees out of pocket in terms of severance.

One of them was Mike Walch, a 22-year employee at the dealership which went bankrupt in 1998.

Walch said the sentence Dohm handed down was about what he expected and added he's since put the episode behind him.

"I believe a lot of the things he was doing was to try and keep the business afloat and keep the people employed," he said. "In a lot of respects, you almost got to say thanks for trying, sort of thing."