Share This Page

Ex-Tiffany exec accused of hawking stolen gems

| Tuesday, July 2, 2013, 6:33 p.m.

NEW YORK — A former executive with Tiffany & Co. stole diamond and other jewelry from the company's Manhattan headquarters and resold it for more than $1.3 million, authorities said on Tuesday.

Ingrid Lederhaas-Okun was arrested at her home in Connecticut on charges of wire fraud and interstate transportation of stolen property. She was later released on $250,000 bond in federal court in Manhattan.

As vice president of product development, the 45-year-old Lederhaas-Okun had authority to “check out” jewelry from Tiffany to provide to potential manufacturers so they could calculate production costs. Authorities allege that whenshe left Tiffany in February, the company discovered she had checked out 164 items that were never returned.

According to a criminal complaint, the missing jewelry included “numerous diamond bracelets in 18-(karat) gold; diamond drop and hoop earrings in platinum or 18-(karat) gold; diamond rings in platinum; rings with precious stones in 18-(karat) gold; and platinum and diamond pendants.”

Lederhaas-Okun claimed she had left some of the jewelry at Tiffany and that some had been lost or damaged, the complaint said. But an investigation found that Lederhaas-Okun resold the goods to an unidentified international dealer for more than $1.3 million, the complaint said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.