A Helena woman who embezzled more than $46,000 from Fort Harrison will not spend any time in prison for her crime.

Instead, Christine Gard, 44, will be on probation for the next five years, including six months of at-home detention. She also was ordered by U.S. District Court Senior Judge Charles Lovell to repay the Veterans Administration $46,356 within the next five years.

The sentence was imposed over the objections of Assistant U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme, who feared that the lack of jail time and mere obligation to repay the stolen money wasn't enough punishment for Gard, nor much of a deterrent for anyone else considering a similar crime.

He noted that this wasn't just a one-time offense, but involved numerous thefts during a 27-month period.

"It took significant planning, it was thoughtful and occurred over a period of time," Alme argued. "Probation is not appropriate for Gard's deterrence, and I'm concerned that people out there who are employed and may be considering or have an opportunity to take this kind of money may not be deterred if the only consequence of their behavior if they get caught is to pay the government or employer back." Gard was a Veterans Administration employee at Fort Harrison, and also did contract work, providing medical transcription typing services. She overstated her line counts on fraudulent invoices submitted to the VA between Sept. 2001 and November 2003, causing her to be overpaid by $46,356. Gard confessed when confronted by law enforcement officials, and blamed her crime on her gambling addiction and medical problems suffered by herself and her children.

"She was a single mother who endured several years of difficult circumstances, primarily revolving around her children ... and an injury she suffered that made her unable to work for some time, resulting in financial difficulties," Gard's attorney, Greg Jackson, said in her defense. "During this time period she dealt with the stresses of her life in a very poor way, an injudicious way, by turning to gambling and using mechanized ways of numbing herself." But Alme pointed out that Gard's children were adults at the time of her crime, that their medical problems involved treatment for drug abuse, and that this was a well-thought-out theft. The maximum sentence for her crime was up to five years in jail and a $250,000 fine.

Lovell acknowledged Alme's concerns, but noted that the best way for Gard to pay restitution is if she is working. The judge pointed out that Gard already is making about $500 per month from a business she's started out of her home, and that her ability to pay off her debt will increase as her income does.

In fact, Lovell took steps to ensure that it will. He noted that her initial discussions with the probation department only mentioned her paying back the money in $100 monthly increments -- which would take about 39 years.

That didn't sit well with the judge.

"She doesn't have any home obligations, she is 44 years old, is healthy and already is doing limited work, plus she is receiving $1,200 a month in retirement," Lovell said. "If she thinks she has stolen $47,000 from the government, and now is receiving $1,200 (a month) from the government in retirement and she's going to not repay that $47,000, that's a pretty optimistic view. And there are many who would think that she shouldn't be permitted to get away with that sort of thing." So as part of the sentence, Lovell ordered that Gard's monthly restitution payments begin at $200 a month for the next six months, then increase to the point where she's averaging at least $800 per month so that the money will be repaid by the time Gard's probation ends in five years.

"The probation officer will advise the court monthly as to whether those payments are being made," Lovell warned.