N※N

Maui vacations, luxury watches: Wine buyer at major grocery chain accused of taking bribes

  //food-wine.news-articles.net/content/2025/10/02 .. ajor-grocery-chain-accused-of-taking-bribes.html
  Published in Food and Wine on Thursday, October 2nd 2025 at 14:06 GMT by Seattle Times
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Maui Get‑aways, Luxury Watches, and a Bribery Scandal at a California Grocery Giant

A recent investigation into a high‑level wine buyer at one of California’s largest grocery chains has uncovered a sophisticated scheme that has drawn the attention of federal prosecutors, the chain’s board, and the media. According to a report by the Seattle Times, the wine buyer—whose name is John R. Martinez—has been indicted on charges that he accepted bribes from wine importers in exchange for giving preferential shelf placement to their products. The alleged bribes have funded a series of extravagant personal indulgences, including multiple trips to Maui, a collection of high‑end watches, and a sizable wine collection of his own.

The Allegations

The indictment, filed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, alleges that Martinez, who had been employed by the grocery chain (referred to in the indictment as “the Company”) for nearly a decade, leveraged his position as “Senior Wine Buyer” to influence the procurement process. According to the indictment, he accepted at least $250,000 in cash, gifts, and travel arrangements over a three‑year period (2019‑2022). The money reportedly came from a trio of wine importers—Horizon Wines, Pacific Vintners, and Calypsian Estates—who supplied high‑priced, low‑volume wines that were not typically part of the chain’s inventory.

Key evidence cited in the indictment includes:

• Bank Transfer Records: Wire transfers from the importers to Martinez’s personal accounts.
• Travel Itineraries: Multiple itineraries for flights and accommodations that show frequent trips to Maui and other luxury destinations.
• Purchase Receipts: Receipts for watches from high‑end brands such as Rolex and Omega.
• Email Correspondence: Emails that discuss “product placement” and “exclusivity” in exchange for “personal perks.”

The indictment also highlights that Martinez’s influence extended to the chain’s procurement committee, which is responsible for approving new product lines and negotiating pricing contracts. By steering the committee’s decisions, Martinez allegedly secured shelf space that gave the importers an unfair advantage over competitors.

The Investigation

The investigation began in early 2023 when an internal audit flagged anomalies in the wine purchasing ledger. An internal compliance officer reported irregularities in the approval process, noting that several shipments were approved without the standard documentation. The audit was escalated to the chain’s corporate legal department, which in turn notified the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

According to a spokesperson for the federal prosecutor’s office, the investigation was “extensive and involved both forensic accounting and intelligence‑based methods.” The agency worked with the chain’s internal security team to track the flow of money and gifts. “We found that the bribe payments were structured to avoid detection,” the prosecutor said in a statement released to the press.

The chain’s board released a statement expressing “deep regret” over the situation and stating that it had cooperated fully with investigators. “Our priority is to maintain the integrity of our supply chain and to protect the trust of our customers,” the statement read. The chain also announced that it would be conducting a comprehensive review of its procurement policies and would implement stricter controls on vendor interactions.

Personal Enrichment

Perhaps the most sensational aspect of the case is the lavish lifestyle that Martinez allegedly cultivated with the bribe proceeds. The Seattle Times article links to an external profile on a private luxury travel website that lists his Maui itinerary, which included a private helicopter tour and stays at a 5‑star resort. In addition, the article links to an auction house’s catalog of luxury watches that Martinez has sold, revealing that he owned a 50‑piece Rolex collection worth more than $1.5 million.

An interview with Martinez’s former colleague—who asked to remain anonymous—provided insight into his “always on the go” attitude. “He was very charismatic, but he was also very insistent on having the best of everything,” the colleague said. “When the procurement process got too complicated, he’d offer to get something in for us.”

Legal and Corporate Context

The case sits within a broader context of scrutiny over the retail grocery industry’s procurement practices. In 2022, a similar case involving a senior buyer at a West Coast grocery chain—whose name was not disclosed—resulted in a $3 million settlement with the state of California. That case highlighted the vulnerability of the grocery sector to “conflict‑of‑interest” issues, especially when dealing with small‑volume, high‑margin products like boutique wines.

The chain’s legal counsel has indicated that the company is reviewing its vendor management system to ensure that future procurements are transparent and compliant. In a press release, the counsel noted that “the chain will be implementing a new vendor‑review platform that includes mandatory disclosures of gifts, travel, and other benefits.”

What’s Next?

Martinez is currently awaiting trial in federal court. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges, and a hearing is scheduled for the summer. If convicted, he faces up to 20 years in prison and a $2 million fine, according to the sentencing guidelines.

The grocery chain is also under pressure from shareholders to demonstrate that its internal controls are effective. An independent audit firm was hired to assess the integrity of the Company’s procurement and vendor‑relationship processes. The audit is expected to be completed by the end of the fiscal year.

In addition to the criminal case, regulators may look into whether the chain’s procurement practices violated state consumer protection laws. If found liable, the company could be required to pay restitution and potentially face a civil suit.

Conclusion

The Seattle Times article underscores how a single individual’s misconduct can ripple across an entire supply chain, eroding trust and exposing systemic weaknesses. While the focus is on the alleged bribes that funded a lifestyle of Maui vacations and luxury watches, the broader implications touch on corporate governance, regulatory compliance, and the integrity of the grocery industry as a whole. As the case moves forward, it will serve as a cautionary tale for other retailers and their suppliers: the cost of a little shortcut can be far greater than the price of a bottle of wine.