Please Note This Is a Two Part Paper
Fraud Incident Background:
In 2014 a Washington, DC journalist by the name of William Thompson loss his job and began eagerly looking for work. Reading the Washington Post he came across an ad where a team of retired news anchors were looking to develop a television station, and they wanted several journalists who would present news on their television station. Since William was desperately looking for a job, he decided to apply for the post. After a few days, the anchors called and informed him that he was among the ten people who were to be vetted for the job. They also told him that he would need to send a total of $300 to book the interview. After the phone call, they sent him an address where the interview would be conducted.
Without properly thinking, William sent the money hoping this would secure a guaranteed interview with this reputable group of anchors. When the interview day approached, William dressed nicely and went to where he was requested to go. He met several other people who had arrived earlier. They all met the office door locked, and some curtains prevented them, from seeing inside. After three hours, the superintendent of the office building spotted them and asked, “What are you all doing here? Do you want me to call the security?” that is when all of potential candidates including William realized that they had all been scammed. Each and every one of them left in despair disappointed in being scammed and after all still without jobs. They presented their case to the District Attorneys Office, who responded to them after some months, telling them that the scammers had been found and that fraud charges would be brought against the retired anchors.
Investigative Project Design: PART 1
This aspect of the three-part assignment will relate to the case you described. Assume you are a fraud examiner available for hire. Provide a discussion of the approach you, as an investigator, would use to look into a lead received about the possible fraud. The discussion should include several steps and indicate what documents you anticipate will be available and important during your investigation, whether interviews of individuals will be involved, who those individuals might be, and how you might analyze the collected information.
Assume you have received a general lead, but not all of the facts you laid out in your case presentation. Think through what type of actions may have occurred or might be taking place during your investigation. What records might be a good source to investigate the situation? Oral evidence through interviews of individuals can be helpful, but documents are necessary to confirm oral evidence. How can you relate oral evidence to documents you expect to find?
This investigative design can be provided in prose or narrative writing, or as a clearly defined numbered list. For those with audit background, this list would be much like an audit program–a sequential list showing a supervisor the expected path you anticipate the investigation to take. The Investigative Design can be posted as a separate document to the Investigative Project Design assignment folder in LEO or as a single document below your Case Presentation paragraphs. If you follow the latter approach, you will be able to view both the case description and your proposed investigative approach on the same document. This might be one-half to one page of narrative. Although not limited, a step-by-step list would probably include no more than ten steps for most cases. When the submitted Investigative Design documents are reviewed, if posted with the case design, only the section about the investigation will be reviewed and graded.
A word of caution here! If a list of steps is provided, there needs to be enough wording that a reader can understand what actions you plan to take during the investigation. This is about explaining to a supervisor how you plan to pursue this fraud. A supervisor, if approving your plan, would be committing your organization to spend the funds to support your efforts and the related expenses. Professionalism in this submission is important.
References and in-text citations are appropriate for this part of the three-part assignment. These sources fortify the merit of your approach to the case and often provide insights about the suitability of your approach to a specific case.
Deterrence Measure Design: PART 2
Considering the case you presented, and the investigative design you offered, what deterrence measures would you suggest to the enterprise you described in your case presentation? Your suggestions will be considered in the context of being both realistic and responsive to the specific presentation you provided. This review of deterrence measures should be written in narrative form. In most cases, the deterrence measures will probably require no more than one full page of text. Post a document with your Case Presentation, Investigative Project Design, and Deterrence Measure Design, to the Assignments folder identified for the Deterrence Measure Design.
You will be able to see the sequence in a single document as you developed and offered a description of fraud based on your readings and understanding of that type of case. You will see your own plan on how to approach the fraud you outlined, including what complexities might be involved. Then, you will have offered suggestions for how the described fraud could be deterred with systematic changes in policies and procedures within the organization you described. Review of the deterrence measure design aspect of the assignment and grading will be limited to that aspect of the posted document.
References and in-text citations are appropriate for this part of the three-part assignment. These sources fortify the merit of your suggestions and often provide insights about the right revisions to address the issues relevant to a specific case.
