A former accounting manager for family-owned women's clothing company Karen Kane has been charged with allegedly funneling more than $2.56 million in company funds into her personal bank accounts over approximately a decade.
The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office announced the charges against Donna Faye Bui, who allegedly took the money while working for Karen Kane, Inc., a clothing company based in Vernon.
Bui was employed as the company's credit and accounting manager from September 2015 through February 2024.
According to prosecutors, Bui held a position that gave her extensive control over company finances. She allegedly was the only person with electronic access to certain company bank accounts and was responsible for paying the company's bills.
That access is at the center of the prosecution's case.
Prosecutors allege Bui transferred approximately $2,562,941 from company accounts into personal bank accounts through hundreds of transactions.
The alleged scheme reportedly continued for years before it was discovered.
Investigators say Bui attempted to conceal the transfers by breaking the allegedly stolen funds into a series of smaller electronic transactions.
The alleged theft was eventually uncovered in February 2024 after Karen Kane's new president noticed suspicious financial activity and initiated an audit of the company's accounts.
WHAT BUI IS ACCUSED OF
Bui faces an unusually large number of felony counts in connection with the alleged financial scheme.
According to the District Attorney's Office, she is charged with 106 felonies in case 26CJCF04447.
The charges include:
- 89 counts of money laundering
- 10 counts of grand theft
- Five counts of filing false tax returns
- One count of failing to file a tax return
- One count of unauthorized computer access
Prosecutors have also alleged white-collar crime and money-laundering enhancements.
The charges reflect prosecutors' allegation that the conduct involved more than simply taking money from an employer. Investigators contend the transfers were structured and concealed through multiple electronic transactions.
Bui is also accused of failing to report the allegedly stolen income to California tax authorities.
The tax allegations add another component to the case, potentially exposing Bui to additional criminal consequences beyond the alleged theft itself.
Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan J. Hochman characterized the alleged conduct as a serious abuse of trust.
“Stealing millions of dollars from your employer as a trusted employee for over a decade is a cruel and calculating criminal deception,” Hochman said.
THE COMPANY'S DISCOVERY
The alleged theft came to light after a change in company leadership.
According to prosecutors, Karen Kane's new president noticed suspicious activity in the company's financial accounts in February 2024.
The company then undertook an audit of its accounts.
That review allegedly uncovered the transfers that prosecutors now say were made by Bui.
The timeline means the alleged conduct extended from Bui's employment beginning in September 2015 until February 2024, when the suspicious activity was discovered.
Prosecutors allege that hundreds of transactions were used to move the money into Bui's personal accounts.
Investigators are now relying on financial records and other evidence to establish the alleged movement of funds and determine how the transactions were carried out.
The case demonstrates how financial crimes can remain difficult to detect when an employee has legitimate access to company accounts and financial systems.
WHAT PROSECUTORS SAY
Hochman warned that financial crimes committed by people in positions of trust can have consequences beyond the immediate financial loss.
“White collar criminals who abuse positions of trust for their own greed are a clear threat to public safety and put anyone or any company with an electronic bank account at risk,” Hochman said.
He added a broader warning to people who might attempt similar schemes.
“Make no mistake: If you steal, embezzle, tax evade, money launder or commit any type of financial crime, you will be investigated and prosecuted,” Hochman said.
The District Attorney's Office also highlighted the alleged duration of the conduct and its potential effects on the company and tax system.
Hochman specifically criticized the decision to release Bui without bail.
“Contrary to what certain judges may believe, white collar crimes like embezzlement, money laundering, and tax evasion that occur over 10 years are not ‘victimless crimes,’” Hochman said.
He argued that companies can be affected by financial crimes because losses can affect their ability to operate and employ workers.
He also said unpaid taxes affect the fairness of the tax system and alleged that financial systems can be “co-opted for criminal purposes.”
BAIL AND COURT PROCEEDINGS
Bui pleaded not guilty during her arraignment on Aug. 26.
At the hearing, the court determined that she was not a threat to public safety and set bail at $0, releasing her on her own recognizance despite the prosecution's objection.
Prosecutors had requested bail of $875,000.
Hochman criticized that decision, saying he believed the alleged duration and scope of the financial conduct justified meaningful bail.
The case is scheduled for a preliminary hearing setting on Oct. 19 in Department 37 of the Foltz Criminal Justice Center.
If convicted as charged, Bui could face decades in state prison.
The prosecution is being handled by Deputy District Attorney Steve Dickman of the White Collar Crime Division.
The investigation involves multiple agencies, including the Vernon Police Department, Los Angeles Police Department, California Franchise Tax Board and the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Bureau of Investigation.
A SECOND WHITE-COLLAR CASE
The District Attorney's Office announced Bui's case alongside another major alleged embezzlement case involving former nonprofit executive Christopher Butler.
Hochman pointed to the Butler prosecution as another example of his office's focus on alleged financial crimes involving long-term positions of trust.
“The case against Donna Bui was filed just weeks after another defendant was ordered to stand trial for allegedly stealing millions of dollars from their long-term employer, the Painted Turtle,” Hochman said.
Butler is accused of embezzling approximately $5.2 million from the Painted Turtle, a nonprofit specialty camp serving children with chronic and life-threatening medical conditions.
Prosecutors allege Butler committed the offenses while serving as the organization's CEO from 2018 through 2025.
Butler, whose case is identified as 25CJCF08298, faces nine felony counts of grand theft, five felony counts of forgery and one felony count of fraudulent use of a computer.
He was held to answer on all charges Aug. 6.
A pretrial conference is scheduled for Sept. 16 in Department 123 of the Foltz Criminal Justice Center.
Butler remains held on $300,000 bail.
If convicted as charged, he faces more than 18 years in state prison.
The Butler case is being prosecuted by Deputy District Attorney Steve Dickman and investigated by the District Attorney's Bureau of Investigation.
THE BIGGER QUESTION
The Bui case highlights the difficulty companies can face when financial responsibilities are concentrated in the hands of a single employee.
According to prosecutors, Bui was the only person with electronic access to certain Karen Kane bank accounts while also being responsible for paying company bills.
That combination allegedly gave her significant control over the movement of company money.
The prosecution will now have to prove its allegations in court, including that Bui unlawfully transferred the money, that the transactions constituted the charged offenses and that she engaged in the alleged laundering and tax-related conduct.
There is also a significant distinction between the allegations and an established finding of guilt. Bui has pleaded not guilty, and the charges have not yet been proven at trial.
The court's decision to release her on her own recognizance also provides an important counterpoint to the prosecution's characterization of the case. While prosecutors requested substantial bail based on the alleged scale and duration of the conduct, the court concluded that Bui did not present a public-safety threat and released her without monetary bail.
That disagreement over bail illustrates that even when prosecutors describe alleged financial conduct as extensive and serious, the court must independently evaluate the defendant's legal status and circumstances.
As the case moves toward its next hearing, prosecutors are expected to continue building their financial evidence while Bui remains entitled to the presumption of innocence.
The case also demonstrates why financial audits and internal controls can be important for companies, particularly when employees have extensive access to electronic banking systems.
For Karen Kane, the alleged misconduct was reportedly uncovered only after a new president noticed suspicious activity and ordered an audit.
For prosecutors, the case represents a significant alleged white-collar crime involving millions of dollars and more than a decade of employment.
For Bui, however, the allegations remain unresolved unless and until prosecutors prove the charges in court.
The charges filed against Bui and Butler are allegations. Both defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.