SFO charges former lawyer with investment theft
Media Release
7 August
2013
SFO charges former lawyer with investment theft
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has announced that 33 criminal charges have been laid against former Dunedin lawyer John David Milne (78) in the Christchurch District Court.
Charges under Section 224 (for offending that occurred prior to 1 October 2003) and Section 220 of the Crimes Act relate to Mr Milne eliciting money from clients or associates on the premise that he would invest that money and pay them a return on their invested funds.
SFO alleges that none of that money had been invested and that some early investors had been repaid with monies received from later clients.
It is believed that Mr Milne operated the scheme for a period in excess of 20 years from 1991 to 2012. The charges relate to approximately $2.8 million.
Mr Milne had a client base in Dunedin derived from his previous legal work in a sole practise there.
SFO Acting Chief Executive, Simon McArley
says, “A sad fact of this case is that a significant
number of Mr Milne’s clients were elderly and vulnerable
people, often widows living alone. We remain deeply
concerned for these victims, who have lost their investments
at a time in their lives when they should be living
comfortably.”
A complaint was received from the New
Zealand Law Society Otago Standards Committee regarding Mr
Milne’s activities around client funds in June last year.
An investigation was opened under Part II of the SFO Act in
July.
ENDS
Notes for
Editors
Background
to investigation
John David Milne is a former
lawyer with Harewood Law Office in Christchurch; this office
was owned by Craig Paddon. Prior to that, he ran a sole
practice in Dunedin from 1960 to 2008.
The New Zealand Law Society found Mr Milne guilty of professional misconduct over his handling of client funds, and he has been struck off the Register of Lawyers.
Mr Milne was declared
bankrupt in October 2012.
Crimes Act
Offences
Section
220 Theft by person in special relationship
(1)
This section applies to any person who has received or is in
possession of, or has control over, any property on terms or
in circumstances that the person knows require the
person—
(a) to account to any other person for the
property, or for any proceeds arising from the property;
or
(b) to deal with the property, or any proceeds arising
from the property, in accordance with the requirements of
any other person.
(2) Every one to whom subsection (1)
applies commits theft who intentionally fails to account to
the other person as so required or intentionally deals with
the property, or any proceeds of the property, otherwise
than in accordance with those requirements.
(3) This
section applies whether or not the person was required to
deliver over the identical property received or in the
person's possession or control.
(4) For the purposes of
subsection (1), it is a question of law whether the
circumstances required any person to account or to act in
accordance with any requirements.
Section 224 Theft by misappropriating
proceeds held under direction (pre October
2003)
Every one commits theft who, having
received, either solely or jointly with any other person,
any money or valuable security, or any power of attorney for
the sale of any real or personal property, with a direction
that the money or any part thereof, or the proceeds or any
part of the proceeds of the security or property, shall be
applied to any purpose or paid to any person specified in
the direction, in violation of good faith and contrary to
the direction, fraudulently applies to any other purpose or
pays to any other person the money or proceeds, or any part
thereof:
Provided that where the person receiving the
money, security, or power of attorney, and the person from
whom he receives it, deal with each other on such terms that
all money paid to the former would, in the absence of any
such direction, be properly treated as an item in a debtor
and creditor account between them, this section shall not
apply unless the direction is in writing.
About
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.
SFO’s role is the detection, investigation and prosecution of serious or complex financial crime. SFO’s focus is on investigating and prosecuting criminal cases that will have a real effect on:
• business and
investor confidence in our financial markets and
economy
• public confidence in our justice system and
public service
• New Zealand’s international business
reputation.
SFO operates three investigative
teams:
• Evaluation and Intelligence;
• Financial
Markets and Corporate Fraud; and
• Fraud and
Corruption.
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…”
SFO’s Annual Report 2012 sets out its
achievements for the past year, while the Statement of
Intent 2013-2016 sets out the SFO’s three year strategic
goals and performance standards. Both are available online
at:
www.sfo.govt.nz