A convicted credit union business relationship manager argued heshould have received a lighter sentence because he used some of themillions in fraudulent loans to keep a struggling company afloatand pocketed just under $200,000 for himself.

A three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appealsin Chicago last month unanimously rejected this appeal and affirmedthe 10-year sentence of Theodore J. Longust handed down by a U.S.District Court judge in November 2016.

Longust pleaded guilty last year to running a six-yearmultimillion-dollar fraudulent loan scheme at the $1.1 billionScott Credit Union in Edwardsville, Ill.

He fraudulently issued loans that caused $13.7 million in lossesto Scott CU. About $1.7 million of these losses arose fromunauthorized loan advances that Longust made to a localcompany.

Before U.S. District Court Judge Staci M. Yandle in Benton,Ill., Longust’s lawyer argued for a seven-year sentence based onhis relatively limited enrichment, the detrimental effect that hisconviction will have on his future work prospects and his desire tokeep the struggling window and door business operating by funnelingit fraudulent loans.

Without any evidence, Longust claimed that the business knew the$1.7 million in loan advances were fraudulent. He argued in courtdocuments that this made his conduct “less egregious.”

Judge Yandle brushed aside Longust’s arguments asirrelevant.

In response to Longust’s point that he kept less than $200,000for his personal use, Judge Yandle stated that his offense wasstill very serious because of the damage he had caused to thecredit union’s finances and reputation.

Although the federal judge noted his lack of criminal history,she emphasized Longust’s betrayal of public trust, the significantlosses of the credit union, including a compelling victim impactstatement by Scott CU President/CEO Frank Padak, which was notincluded in the public record.

In addition to the $13.7 million in losses stemming fromLongust’s crimes, Scott CU lost an additional $12 million fromdefaulted loans. Although Longust lawfully issued those loans, theywere not supported by sufficient collateral, according to courtdocuments.