Media Release
5 December 2012
Second guilty plea in SFO investigation
Paul Michael Normington (33) has pleaded guilty in the Auckland District Court today to 17 Crimes Act and Secret
Commissions Act charges laid by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).
Mr Normington was facing charges of theft, dishonestly using a document and taking secret commissions. He was also
facing a charge of accessing a computer system for dishonest purpose.
While working for his former employer, the Sutton Group (Sutton), he participated in a number of transactions to defraud
Sutton either by the creation of false invoices, theft of product or by receiving secret commissions from a supplier of
product to Sutton. Mr Normington also copied electronic files from the Sutton server for his own benefit.
Acting SFO Chief Executive, Simon McArley, said, “This second guilty plea re-emphasises that focusing on early reporting
of suspicious criminal activity can bring positive results. Although Mr Normington has defrauded his previous employer
of financial and intellectual resource, early intervention has halted further losses.”
Last month, Mr Normington’s co-accused, Jin Weifeng also pleaded guilty to charges in relation to defrauding Sutton. He
will be sentenced on 14 March.
Mr Normington will also reappear for sentencing on 14 March.
ENDS
Background to investigation
The Sutton Group (Sutton) is a company based in Auckland. Sutton is a significant producer of dairy products, the
majority of which being for export.
Paul Michael Normington was a Purchasing Manager at the Sutton Group (Sutton) with a primary role of identifying
reputable suppliers, negotiating commercial terms and placing orders to meet the demand for the Sutton plant. He
finished at Sutton in December 2011.
Crimes Act offences:
Section 219 Theft or stealing
(1) Theft or stealing is the act of,—
(a) dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that
property or of any interest in that property; or
(b) dishonestly and without claim of right, using or dealing with any property with intent to deprive any owner
permanently of that property or of any interest in that property after obtaining possession of, or control over, the
property in whatever manner.
(2) An intent to deprive any owner permanently of property includes an intent to deal with property in such a manner
that—
(a) the property cannot be returned to any owner in the same condition; or
(b) any owner is likely to be permanently deprived of the property or of any interest in the property.
(3) In this section, taking does not include obtaining ownership or possession of, or control over, any property with
the consent of the person from whom it is obtained, whether or not consent is obtained by deception.
(4) For tangible property, theft is committed by a taking when the offender moves the property or causes it to be moved
Section 223 Punishment of theft
Every one who commits theft is liable as follows:
(a) in the case of any offence against section 220, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years; or
(b) if the value of the property stolen exceeds $1,000, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years; or
(c) if the value of the property stolen exceeds $500 but does not exceed $1,000, to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding 1 year; or
(d) if the value of the property stolen does not exceed $500, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months.
Section 228 Dishonestly taking or using document
Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who, with intent to obtain any property, service,
pecuniary advantage, or valuable consideration,—
(a) dishonestly and without claim of right, takes or obtains any document; or
(b) dishonestly and without claim of right, uses or attempts to use any document.
Section 249 Accessing computer system for dishonest purpose
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who, directly or indirectly, accesses any
computer system and thereby, dishonestly or by deception, and without claim of right,—
(a) obtains any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration; or
(b) causes loss to any other person.
(2) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years who, directly or indirectly, accesses any
computer system with intent, dishonestly or by deception, and without claim of right,—
(a) to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration; or
(b) to cause loss to any other person.
(3) In this section, deception has the same meaning as in section 240(2).
Secret Commissions Act offences:
Section 5 Duty of agent to disclose pecuniary interest in contract
(1) Every agent is guilty of an offence who makes a contract on behalf of his principal and fails to disclose to his
principal, at the time of making the contract or as soon as possible thereafter, the existence of any pecuniary interest
which the agent has in the making of the contract, unless to the knowledge of the agent the existence of such pecuniary
interest is already known to his principal.
(2) For the purposes of this section any pecuniary interest which a parent, husband, wife, civil union partner, de facto
partner, child, or partner of the agent has in the making of the contract shall be deemed to be the pecuniary interest
of the agent, unless he proves that he had no knowledge of that interest at the time when he made the contract.
(3) For the purposes of this section an agent shall not be deemed to have any pecuniary interest in the making of a
contract by reason merely of the fact that he or any person mentioned in the last preceding subsection is a shareholder
in an incorporated company having more than 20 members.
Role of the SFO
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) was established in 1990 under the Serious Fraud Office Act in response to the collapse of
financial markets in New Zealand at that time.
The SFO operates three investigative teams:
• Evaluation & Intelligence;
• Financial Markets & Corporate Fraud; and
• Fraud & Corruption.
The SFO operates under two sets of investigative powers.
Part I of the SFO Act provides that it may act where the Director “has reason to suspect that an investigation into the
affairs of any person may disclose serious or complex fraud.”
Part II of the SFO Act provides the SFO with more extensive powers where: “…the Director has reasonable grounds to
believe that an offence involving serious or complex fraud may have been committed…”
The SFO’s Annual Report 2012 sets out its achievements for the past year, while the Statement of Intent 2012-2015 sets
out the SFO’s three year strategic goals and performance standards. Both are available online at: www.sfo.govt.nz