A teller at the former Bayshore Credit Union who pleaded guilty to fraud over $5,000 and laundering the proceeds of crime has been given a two-year conditional sentence.

Cheryl Drumm, 53 and two co-accused were charged in 2016 after a forensic accountant's investigation determined $1-million had been diverted from the credit union to the trio.

A tearful and remorseful Drumm appeared before the court held virtually at the Quinte Consolidated Courthouse on Friday.  Drumm said she has been unemployable for the past six years because of the charges against her.

"I am thankful that this will put the challenging years to rest and there will be some resolution," she said.  "In the past, I have not been able to offer any restitution and I would like to offer that and hope that the outcome of your decision allows me to."

Drumm will spend the first 10 months of her conditional sentence under house arrest.  She is allowed to leave her house for employment and child care responsibilities plus other exceptions such as medical appointments, errands and attending church.  Her house arrest will be followed by three years probation.  She was also given an $89,000 restitution order to be paid back at $300/month and is barred from seeking or obtaining any employment with a financial institution for 10 years.  

In handing down his sentence Justice Patrick Hurley said he considered Drumm's guilty plea.

"She expressed remorse for her actions to the author of the presentence report and accepted responsibility for what she had done acknowledging the harm it had caused her former employer and the shame and embarrassment it had brought upon her family," he said.

Hurley said he found Drumm's remorse genuine noting she wants to repay the credit union in full through monthly payments and the transfer of any pension entitlement from the credit union.

Hurley also took into account Drumm did not have a criminal record, she had a positive pre-sentence report, a commitment to family and community plus a supportive family and employer.

One of her past managers said he was 'shocked' by Drumm's 'wrongful conduct.'  He described her as a 'good person who did a bad thing.'  Drumm's son also described his mother as a doting grandmother who has always been community-minded.

But Hurley did not excuse the 'scale of fraud and duration of it.'

Drumm occupied a position at the credit union which allowed her to manipulate the internal accounting system to embezzle the money and transfer it to herself and her two confederates, he said.

"The fraud was not complicated and could have been detected at a much earlier date," he said.  "It was inevitable that it would be at some point."

Evidence entered into the court showed over four years from Jan 2010 to Dec 2014, Drumm defrauded the credit unit of $1,067,397.55.

Hurley said Drumm received $89,092.81, Allan William Lasher $575,054.24 and George Misuraca $407,134.43.

Charges were later withdrawn against Lasher and Misuraca with a portion or restitution repaid.  It was explained to the court that the charges were withdrawn against Lasher and Misuraca 'based on perceived difficulties in proving the case, their level of involvement in the crime and restitution that they paid.'

He said Drumm's crime had serious financial consequences for both the credit union and insurer.

The Credit Union's insurer paid the full amount of the loss of $1,074,460.55. In turn, the insurer recovered $806,060 from the Credit Union's auditors and Drumm's accomplices. It incurred approximately $300,000 in expenses associated with the investigation of the claim. It is seeking restitution from Drumm for $93,911.  

Drumm's motivation for committing the crime remains 'puzzling,' said Hurley.

"Obviously greed was a reason she diverted some of the money to herself but that does not explain why over 90 per cent of the embezzled funds went to two people that she does not appear to have a personal relationship with," he said.  

Hurley said Drumm may have 'wanted to help out these customers whose businesses at the time were failing and believed that they would repay the money.'

"When they could not she was unable in her former manager's view to 'find a way out and continued with the fraud,'" he stated.

"A fraud of this nature would result in a lengthy jail sentence," Hurley said.  "I haven't done that.  One of the main reasons is what your former manager said.  You're a good person who did a bad thing."