portion of the amount due on that note and that Signature would be deprived of the benefit of the payoff unless it owned the Green Road Property. Also inescapable is the inference that in inducing the FNBC to make the loan on the conditions its board of directors dictated, Ledford, O'Dell, Smith, Thomas, and Ownbey were acting as members of Leasing as well as on behalf of Signature. 116 . Although the record does not reveal that FNBC was insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the probability is that it was. And if not, Ledford and O’Dell would be amenable to prosecution under Georgia law for theft by deception. See, e.g., O.C.G.A. § 16-8-3; Gentry v. State, 202 Ga.App. 465, 414 S.E.2d 696, 697 (1992). 117 . See United States v. Hollis, 971 F.2d 1441, 1452 (10th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). 118 .Walker and Ledford made this demand on
holding that a defendant can be held liable when it knowingly participates in the creation of a false or misleading statement holding a defendant may be convicted of mail fraud if he knowingly and willfully participates in a fraudulent scheme created and set in motion by others holding that a person violates the bank fraud statute when he knowingly executes a scheme to obtain money from a financial institution by means of false or fraudulent representations if a defendant knowingly provided materially false information in order to induce the loan the crime is complete and it is irrelevant whether or not he intended to repay or was capable of repaying it holding that 18 usc  1028aal which makes it an aggravated crime to knowingly transfer  without lawful authority a means of identification of another person requires proof that the defendant not only knowingly transferred something but that he knew it was a means of identification and that it belonged to another person holding that the prosecutor is prohibited from knowingly presenting or failing to correct false and material evidence against the defendant