Skip to main content

Former Accounting Supervisor Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $3.6 Million from Employer

HOUSTON—A former accounting supervisor for a Houston area chemicals company has pleaded guilty to embezzling more than $3.6 million from her employer, United States Attorney Tim Johnson announced today.

Diana Simon, 49, of Sugar Land, Texas, appeared before United States District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt today and pleaded guilty to wire fraud arising from a scheme she devised to steal more than $3.6 million from her employer, Kaneka Texas. Kaneka Texas is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kaneka Japan, a Japanese chemicals company. Kaneka Texas is located in Pasadena, Texas.

As an accounts supervisor, Simon was responsible for processing invoices submitted by vendors for payment. Simon pleaded guilty to using this process to create and implement a false and fraudulent scheme to cause $3,621,220 from her employer’s bank account to be wired to her own bank account at a Houston area bank from June 2006 through February 2008. Simon used the embezzled money to buy a luxury home, luxury vehicles, jewelry and financed multiple gambling trips to Louisiana and Las Vegas.

Simon now faces up to 20 years of imprisonment for the wire fraud conviction to be followed by a three-year-term of supervised release as well as a maximum fine of $250,000. Additionally, per the terms of her plea agreement, Simon is required to make a full and complete disclosure of all assets in which she has any financial interest, has agreed to forfeit whatever interest she may have in assets related to the commission of the wire fraud and will pay any restitution to the company ordered by the court.

Simon has been permitted to continue to on bond pending sentencing. Judge Hoyt has set sentencing for Jan. 25, 2010.

The investigation leading to the charges was conducted by the FBI and initiated in 2008 prompted by the company’s discovery of the embezzlement. Assistant U.S. Attorney Vernon Lewis is prosecuting the case.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...