BM>I wouldn't think that a bank would consider embezzlement to be of a lower
  >priority than usual daily business.  From media reports, I would say that
  >embezzlers go for high stakes, not petty theft. It is therefore, IMO, not 
at
  >all unreasonable for a victim to assume "emergency." Otherwise, this 
practis
  >would not succeed at all.
There really is no comparison between "Commandeering" and the 
"embezzelment" situation you posit.  While banks are admittedly not
too happy about being victimized I don't see that an embezzelment would
rise to the level of being an "emergency" as defined under the law and
in Webster's.
CHARLES HUNTER
 * 1st 2.00 #9124 * OS/2 was written on a Monday
--- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671
---------------