Police: Bookkeeper took $63K from Murrysville real estate agency | TribLIVE.com

Police: Bookkeeper took $63K from Murrysville real estate agency

Renatta Signorini

An Indiana County woman is accused of transferring nearly $63,000 from a Murrysville real estate agency into her personal bank accounts, according to court papers.

Angelica S. Botti, 40, of Robinson, was working as a bookkeeper for Re/Max Heritage when police said the thefts occurred. She is charged with unlawful use of a computer, theft, forgery and money laundering.

Botti was responsible for transferring money from Re/Max accounts into the personal accounts of real estate agents during her time working there between November and July, according to court papers. But when several real estate agents notified Re/Max officials they hadn’t received their money, an investigation began.

Officials said the money later was put into the appropriate accounts, making whole those who were affected.

An audit showed nearly $63,000 that should have been paid to the agents instead was deposited in accounts under Botti’s name at four different banks between May 31 and June 25, according to court papers.

She has repaid $10,000, police said.

Botti was arraigned Friday and is free on recognizance bond. An Aug. 20 preliminary hearing is set. Her attorney declined to comment.

Renatta Signorini is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Renatta at 724-837-5374, [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.