THREE OBJECTIVES WERE SET FOR THE STUDY: (1) TO DETERMINE IF A SPECIFIC EMBEZZLEMENT MODEL CAN BE IDENTIFIED FOR THE RETAIL DRUG INDUSTRY; (2) TO DETERMINE IF THAT MODEL CAN BE MEASURED EMPIRICALLY; AND (3) TO DETERMINE IF THE MODEL DIFFERS FROM THE SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY THEORIES OUTLINED BY SUTHERLAND (1949) AND CRESSEY (1973). DATA WERE OBTAINED FROM THE LOSS-PREVENTION DEPARTMENT OF ONE MAJOR RETAIL DRUG COMPANY FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1976 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1977. THE SAMPLE CONSISTED OF 49 PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN APPREHENDED WHILE CONVERTING COMPANY FUNDS TO THEIR OWN USE WITHOUT PROPER COMPENSATION TO THE COMPANY. EACH PERSON IN THE SAMPLE WAS ANALYZED TO DETERMINE PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, BACKGROUND, AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENSE. A MODEL IS DEVELOPED SHOWING THAT THE RETAIL DRUG EMBEZZLER IS A SINGLE MALE APPROXIMATELY 28 YEARS OLD. HE IS NORMALLY A CLERK, WHO HAS OPPORTUNITY TO STEAL BECAUSE OF HIS POSITION IN THE COMPANY. THE EMBEZZLER'S INCOME IS MEDIUM-LOW, AROUND $7,700 ANNUALLY, AND THE AMOUNT STOLEN AVERAGES APPROXIMATELY $1,000. IT IS INDICATED THAT THE RETAIL DRUG MODEL DEVELOPED DOES NOT DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE EMBEZZLEMENT PROFILE CONSTRUCTED BY REDDEN (1939). IN CONTRAST TO SUTHERLAND'S THEORY, THE DEVELOPED EMBEZZLEMENT MODEL INDICATES THAT THE 'SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY' CRIMINAL IN THE RETAIL DRUG INDUSTRY IS NOT WELL-OFF FINANCIALLY. CRESSEY'S THEORY THAT EMBEZZLEMENT DERIVES FROM A NONSHARABLE AND SECRETLY RESOLVED FINANCIAL DIFFICULTY IS CHALLENGED BY NOTING THAT 6 PERCENT OF THE EMBLEZZLERS ENGAGED IN COLLUSION WITH OTHERS. RESEARCH QUESTIONS RAISED AS A RESULT OF THE DATA ARE PROPOSED. REFERENCES AND DATA ARE PROVIDED.