You are here

To prove fraud : five elements incriminating


Alain Thériault

March 27, 2018 07:00

An element that makes all the difference between fraud and misconduct is the intention, explains Miruna Minea-Burga, author of a thesis of masters degree on advisors fraudsters at theUniversity of Sherbrooke.

This is the key element, she said. It is also the most difficult to prove in a legal procedure, » she adds.

The author of a false signature is often a consultant who has committed an offence under the pressure of deadlines and workload, or to avoid a displacement more costly than the expected payoff. This is not in fact a fraudster.

He will have to prove among other things that the advisor had the required training, he knew the proper procedures and had done several times. It is necessary to demonstrate that he had the professional obligation to be accurate.

This may serve as evidence, if the advisor has made an effort to hide the files, destroyed evidence or made false statements. It may also be solicited false testimony, or » have obstructed efforts in the search for the truth «. It will be as strong incriminating that he used the money for its own personal purposes. In general, it will have laid the illegal act repeatedly and makes contradictory statements, in addition to impede the investigation.

In addition to the intention, other elements will seal the end of a trial in a case of fraud : concealing the purpose or intent of the gesture ; and have taken advantage of the ignorance or negligence of the victim ; he had carried the victim to take to his game on a voluntary basis ; have tried to conceal the offence.

Related posts

Leave a Comment