is the extent to which the position provides the freedom to commit a difficult-to-detect wrong.” United States v. Laljie, 184 F.3d 180, 194 (2d Cir.1999) (internal quotation marks omitted). “Whether a given position is one of trust ... is to be viewed from the perspective of the offense victims and ... will depend on the practice of the employer who is victimized.” Id. at 195 (citation omitted). Here, Anselm used an altered merchant marine license to gain a position as captain of a tugboat owned by Ognenov-ski. He performed this role without supervision, enabling him to use the tugboat for unauthorized purposes without detection. This is precisely the sort of autonomy we have held to characterize a position of trust. See, e.g., United States v. Allen, 201 F.3d 163, 166-67 (2d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Castagnet, 936 F.2d 57, 58,
holding that a third party who receives trust property on inquiry notice that a trustee has misappropriated trust funds is also liable for breach of trust holding that officer manager who had no regular or direct supervision and was authorized to write checks and control budget preparations held a position of trust holding appellants reassignment from a command position to an investigative position where he reported to an officer with a lower rank and no longer served as a direct report to the chief of police supported a conclusion that appellant was transferred to a less prestigious position holding that courier is not in position of trust holding that property manager held to be a professional when granted broad autonomy and unfettered discretion