A job title can sound powerful. It does not necessarily prove actual control.
In corporate criminal allegations, the distinction between designation and actual responsibility can become significant. The evidence may need to establish who controlled funds, approved transactions, signed documents, managed accounts or made the decisions alleged to constitute the offence.
This is particularly important where several employees, directors or officers are implicated together.
The legal analysis should therefore move from labels to functions: What did the person actually do? What authority did the person possess? What documents show that authority? What conduct is specifically attributed?
The answer may materially affect the way a criminal case is understood.
A defence built around precise documentary facts is generally more useful than a broad statement that the accused “was only an employee”.