POCATELLO — Officials at New Day Products in Pocatello are feeling a bit frustrated, feeling as if they are being asked to dedicate an endless amount of resources to get back some of the money that was taken from the nonprofit.

    The case against New Day’s former chief executive officer, Nancy John, took a while to unfold, and still isn’t complete. A restitution hearing is still pending.

    Officials at the nonprofit first suspected improprieties on her part in early 2010, but it wasn’t until July of 2011 that John was charged.

    At that time, she was hit with 35 counts of felony theft by common law larceny, extortion or receiving stolen goods, accused of embezzling tens of thousands of dollars from New Day at the time. During the early stages of the investigation, New Day hired a forensic accountant and the nonprofit’s current CEO, Terry Fredrickson, says the figure given them by that forensic accountant surpasses $200,000.

    Fredrickson says that funds they allege John took directly and indirectly, and the money they owe that was not paid during John’s tenure, nearly shut down the nonprofit.

    As part of a plea agreement John pleaded guilty in March to one count. Prosecutors dismissed the other 34 and agreed they would not oppose a withheld judgment. Sixth District Judge Stephen Dunn, in sentencing John to 10 years probation, denied that request for a withheld judgment, telling her that because New Day provides a unique community service, she essentially broke a public trust in embezzling at least $20,000.

    She was also ordered to serve 10 days in the Bannock County Jail.

    What wasn’t decided during that hearing, however, was just how much total restitution John would have to pay to New Day. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys did agree that it would be at least $20,000 and Dunn ordered that much in restitution be paid.

    A restitution hearing has been set for Oct. 30, but the work New Day has been called on to do in preparation for that hearing has been significant, Fredrickson said. He also said some of the information they have been asked to provide at the request of the defense is far more detailed than they believe is necessary.

    “It’s crazy, some of the stuff they are asking for,” Fredrickson said, declining to elaborate. “Most of the stuff he was asking for was already in the binder. Some of the other information was stuff that just shouldn’t have been asked for.”

    The binder Fredrickson mentioned is a three-inch binder that he and others at New Day filled with paperwork documenting each and every transgression they believe John committed during her final two and a half years as New Day CEO. It was too cost prohibitive, Fredrickson said, to have the forensic accountant review a longer period of the nonprofit’s financial records.

    The records they did provide were compiled at the request of Bannock County Chief Deputy Prosecutor Vic Pearson, who is prosecuting the case against John.

    “He said that for everything we believed was taken, we needed to have a statement that showed what it was, the amount we claimed was gone, evidence that proved it was gone and proof that she took it,” Fredrickson said.

    The names of any witnesses who could testify to each amount taken was also to be provided, he said.

    Once that was compiled and provided to prosecutors in early July, the Oct. 30 restitution hearing was scheduled. Fredrickson believed he was set to go until getting another letter from the Bannock County Prosecutor’s Office in mid-September.

    That letter included a supplemental request for discovery from John’s attorney, Keith Zollinger. Fredrickson said he put together as much of the additional information as he could and sent it off to the prosecutor’s office. At the end of September, he received another letter telling him the additional documentation was needed because of the significant amount of restitution being requested, more than $200,000.

    That letter, which Fredrickson said implies they may not get all the restitution they are requesting without the additional documentation, appears to have pushed the frustration among officials at New Day beyond their capacity. It led Fredrickson, with permission from the nonprofit’s board, to speak about the issue.

    He said the case has been exasperating for New Day from early on — the length of time it took for charges to even be filed, what they consider to be a relatively lenient sentence, and now the lack of accountability in regards to the total amount they are owed in restitution.

    “We believe we can show that it caused us more than $200,000 in losses,” Fredrickson said of John’s transgressions. “We believe that we could show that to a jury. Why are they asking for this further information when we are giving you this huge binder? ”

    To that question, Pearson answers simply that it’s within the defense attorney’s right to ask for the information through the rules of discovery. It’s evidence that attorney is gathering as part of his defense.

    Pearson, who said he cannot discuss the John case specifically because it is still an ongoing case, did say that if a defense attorney asked for information that he believed was not relevant to the case, he would argue that point.

    “The discovery process has to be relevant to the case,” he said.

    But if those documents requested by the defense are reasonable or at least allowed, they have to be provided, and they can’t be compiled by his office.

    “Generally speaking, the documents typically are not in our control,” Pearson said of the average restitution situation. “They are in the victim’s control, that’s why they have to provide the documents.”

    Pearson said he will always seek the restitution a victim believes they are owed but he must be able to prove that the amount requested is owed with evidence specific to the request.