Fraud Theory Analysis of the Zarmoon-Free-Samples for Students

Question: Write a Fraud Theory Analysis of the Zarmoon Inshanalli Case, and post your analysis to the Case Discussion 2 forum. Answer: Case Facts It can be noted that Ms. Inshanalli was charged of committing fraud under section 380(1) and 733.(1) of the Criminal code.She had pleaded guilty to the charge of committing fraud which amounted to more than $5000. It is to be stated that Ms. Inshanalli had been working in WSC Corporation Coppinwood Golf Club as a book keeper for a period of almost two years from April 2014 to January 2016. During the course of her employment Ms. Inshanalli had fraudulently written 134 cheques to herself. It is to be stated that all the cheques had been deposited into different bank accounts of Zamroon Nisha Inshanalli and were written to her name. Further 125 of the cheques written by her contained Gerard Waslens Signature, which she had forged. Zamroon Nisha Inshanalli is the wife of RaffiqInshanalli. They have a son who resides with them and is 34 years of age. Zamroon Niha Inshanalli is 62 years old. It was apparent that the son and husband of Ms. Inshanalli were aware of her fraudulent activities and her convictions in the past for the same reasons. It can be stated, in this case that the defendant had committed fraud amounting to $463,824.42. The defendant in this case, Ms Inshanalli however had made a restitution of $54,000. $409,824.42 were left as outstanding dues. Fraud theory analysis Numerous fraud theories can be used and applied in this case for analyzing the misconduct of the fraudsters and discuss the main reasons for committing fraud by fraudsters (Morales, Gendron Gunin-Paracini, 2014). The fraud theories that will be applied in this case are: Fraud Triangle theory This theory states that three different factors can transform a person who is trustworthy to a fraudster. The aforementioned factors are: Perceived Pressure The motivation to commit fraud is provided to the fraudsters by the perceived pressure (Schuchter Levi, 2015). At times trustworthy people resort to committing fraud as a result of facing acute financial problems which cannot be solved lawfully. As a result of facing such financial problems trustworthy people resort to illegal and unethical standards. Perceived opportunity- It is to be mentioned that a person, who is trustworthy commits a fraudulent activity when he finds an opportunity to take advantage of the victims trust (Free, 2015). This factor provides explanation of how the fraud takes place. Rationalization- It is to be noted that most fraudsters are not criminals and therefore they can personally justify the reasons for committing frauds. However, the principle of rationalization is not to be applied to assess the reason of committing fraud by predatory fraudsters. The factors of the fraud triangle theory cannot be implemented in this chosen case as it has been noted that Ms Inshanalli had been convicted of fraudulent activities in the past on two occasions. Her first conviction was on May 13 2004 for a theft of $750,000. She had again committed theft of $141,000 over a time period of two years from 2010 to 2012 from her employer, Sherwood Innovations. On the second occasion she had pleaded guilty and had to serve an eighteen month conditional sentence followed by a probation period of two years. Therefore after analyzing the aforementioned facts it is to be said that her behavior resembles that of predatory fraudster. The Fraud Scale It can be said that this theory came into being in the 1984 and it substituted the theory of fraud triangle. The Fraud Scale theory considers the factor integrity in addition to the al other factors of the theory of Fraud Triangle (Schuchter Levi, 2015). The commitment of a person to ethics is the factor that assesses the integrity of the person. Therefore it can be stated that a person acting under low pressure, with low opportunity and high integrity is less expected to commit fraud than some who has low integrity, high opportunity and under high pressure. In this chosen case study it can be stated that the principles of fraud scale theory cannot be completely applied as the defendant, Ms Inshanalli had exhibited similar conduct on numerous occasions in the past. However, the factor integrity can be assessed in this given scenario. She had exhibited low integrity and was presented with high opportunity. The combination of these two factors increased her chances of committing fraud Rational Choice Theory It is to be stated that this theory has three main and main conditions of fraud. They are: Individuals aim and act to fulfill their self interest. Individuals aim to maximize their personal goals The fraudster often places his own interests above the interest of any other party. The rational theory suggests that offenders commit a crime after evaluating the benefits to be acquired by the crime and consequences of committing the same (Anand, Dacin Murphy, 2015). In the aforementioned case it can be stated that the defendant had committed fraud on numerous occasions as she had perceived that it was easy to get away with it. She had committed the frauds to improve her well being and financial status which seemed to be of greater importance than the consequence of it. Conclusion Thus to conclude it is be stated that all the theories discussed above have been able to analyze the factors that drive individuals to commit fraud. It is to be stated that in the R vs Paterson, 2013, case it was analyzed by the court that the defendants main motive to commit fraud was to recover from the financial crisis faced by him due to his failing business. Thus by applying the theory of fraud triangle it is to be said that the defendant had been under a lot of pressure and thus seized the opportunity to take advantage of his position. It is mainly due to this reason that he committed the fraud. In this case the defendant was not under any pressure and she committed fraud primarily because she wanted to improve her financial status and her well being. By the application of the Rationalization theory it is to be said that she had committed the crimes as she had assessed that the consequences of the crimes likely to be faced by her were outweighed by the benefit of the crime. Bibliography: Anand, V., Dacin, M. T., Murphy, P. R. (2015). The continued need for diversity in fraud research.Journal of Business Ethics,131(4), 751-755. Free, C. (2015). Looking through the fraud triangle: A review and call for new directions.Meditari Accountancy Research,23(2), 175-196. Morales, J., Gendron, Y., Gunin-Paracini, H. (2014). The construction of the risky individual and vigilant organization: A genealogy of the fraud triangle.Accounting, Organizations and Society,39(3), 170-194. v. Inshanalli, 2017 ONCJ 234 v. Paterson, 2013 BCPC 5 Schuchter, A., Levi, M. (2015, September). Beyond the fraud triangle: Swiss and Austrian elite fraudsters. In Accounting Forum(Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 176-187). Elsevier. Schuchter, A., Levi, M. (2015, September). Beyond the fraud triangle: Swiss and Austrian elite fraudsters. InAccounting Forum(Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 176-187). Elsevier. Schuchter, A., Levi, M. (2016). The fraud triangle revisited.Security Journal,29(2), 107-121.