FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Former Kansas Credit Union Loan Officer Sentenced for Embezzlement

Ricky Naovoravong was sentenced to 19 months in prison and ordered to pay restitution after pleading guilty to embezzling over $171,000 through fictitious loans.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 1, 2026, 4:56 p.m. ET
Developing · not yet checked for updates

This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.

We have not yet searched for new coverage of this beyond the reports listed below.

On September 1, 2026, a former Kansas credit union loan officer was to 19 months in prison and ordered to pay $207,920 in restitution after embezzling approximately $171,000 by creating fake loans, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Kansas. Ricky Naovoravong, 39, of Garden City, pleaded guilty to one count of embezzlement by a credit union employee. Court documents state that in August 2024, a manager noticed a suspicious transfer from a member's savings account into Naovoravong's checking account. The manager found that Naovoravong had created documents for a $5,000 loan in the victim's name and used the victim's account to make loan payments that were deposited into his own account. A broader investigation revealed Naovoravong had created other loans and transferred funds into his personal account. When confronted, he admitted the loans were fictitious and that the victims knew nothing of them. He said he planned to continue creating new fictitious loans to make payments on previous ones to avoid detection. The investigation showed he embezzled $171,164 between November 2020 and August 2024. U.S. Attorney Ryan Kriegshauser said, "Banks and credit unions collect people's personal information because it's a requirement of doing business. When employees with access to sensitive information use it to commit fraud, embezzlement, or other types of financial crimes, they will eventually get caught. When they are exposed, they'll have to face the justice system." The FBI investigated the case.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 11 Sept 2026, 20:56current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.