Godwin Emmanuel Oyedokun presented a paper on managing the risk of fraud investigations from the investigation room to the courtroom. The presentation covered fraud investigations, risks and risk management in investigations, the rights of suspects during investigations, and the role of fraud examiners as expert witnesses in court. It emphasized the need for investigators to properly handle evidence and respect suspects' rights per applicable laws to avoid losing strong cases in court.

1. Managing the Risk of Fraud Investigation: From
Investigation Room to Court Room
Compiled and Presented
BY
Godwin Emmanuel OYEDOKUN
(HND, BSc.Ed, MBA, MSc., MTP (SA), ACA, ACIB, FCTI, AMNIM, ACCA-CertIFR, CFA, CFE, CNA, CICA, CPFA)
godwinoye@yahoo.com +2348033737184
Assistant Director (Head) Education, Research & Technical
The Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria
Vice President
ACFE Nigeria Chapter
Being a paper presented at
7th
ANNUAL ACFE AFRICA CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION
At Sandton International Convention Centre,
Johannesburg South Africa
•6 - 8 October 2014
Themes: Interdependency to Success

2. 2
The Facilitator- “Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet”
Godwin Emmanuel Oyedokun, HND, BSc.Ed, MBA, MSc., MTP (SA), ACA, ACTI, ACIB, AMNIM, CNA, CICA, CFA,CFE, CPFA, FCFIP, CertIFR
Assistant Director (Head) – Finance & ICT Directorate of The Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria (CITN)
Godwin is an Experience Certified Forensic Accountant, Certified Fraud Examiner, Certified Forensic Investigator, Chartered
Accountant, National Accountant, Chartered Tax Professional, Chartered Banker, Chartered Manager, Chartered
Administrator, Insolvency Practitioner, Project Management Expert, and Financial Analyst of good repute. A registered
Professional in Nigeria with the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (FRC).
He holds a Certificate in International Financial Reporting (CertIFR) of Association of Certified Chartered Accountant (ACCA)
Also, he holds B.Sc. Ed in Accounting at University of Ado- Ekiti, (now Ekiti State University) Nigeria. He bagged his MBA in
Finance & Accounting at Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ogun State of Nigeria in 2006/2007 academic sessions and graduated
with merit. He recently completed his MSc. Accounting of Babcock University, while is also currently an MSc Business &
Applied Economics (Finance option) student of Olabisi Onabanjo University.
Godwin is a leader in Taxation, Forensic Accounting and Fraud Investigation, he is a sought after intellectual, who has
presented over 195 technical papers in various Training/Seminars on Forensic Accounting, Fraud Investigation, Taxation,
Internal Audit & Control, Risk Management, IFRS, ICT, Strategic Management, Finance & Accounting related subjects. He is
also an Examiner to The Chartered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria (CIBN) on “Introduction to Financial Accounting (FA)” and
“Information Communication Technology (ICT)”
He is a seasoned professional who is currently serving as an Advisory Council Member of Association of Fraud Examiner
(ACFE), Austin, USA, and Vice President of Nigeria Chapter of same Association
He was the Assistant Director (Head) – Education, Research & Technical of The Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria
(CITN).
He is the Chief Technical Consultant to OGE & CO Professional Services Ltd. (www.ogecops.com) and A & D Forensic
Consults Ltd. Nigeria (www.adforensicconsults.com).

3. This presentation will cover the following major sub topics on Risk of Fraud
Investigation:
•Introduction
•Lie, Fraud, and Fraud Investigation
•Fraud Investigation
•Risk & Risk Management
•Risk of Fraud Investigation
•Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
•Fraud Investigation and Evidence
•Fraud Investigator in Court
•Conclusion
Contents
Oyedokun Godwin Emmanuel

4. Introduction
Fraud examiners and anti-fraud Professionals are usually
exposed to various risks in their bid to eliciting responses
form the suspects.
This is usually in form of criminal charges filed against the
fraud examiners and possible expulsion of the evidence at
the trail.
This presentation considered and explored the Concept of
Investigation, how to handle Fraud Investigation, the legal
rights of the suspect during and after Fraud Investigation,
the best way to handle Fraud Investigation & Evidence and
intimate the participants on the role of Fraud Investigation
as Expect Wittiness in Court of Law.

5. Introduction

6. Lie, Fraud, and Fraud Investigation
Meaning of Lie
Lie is a false statement made with deliberate
intent to deceive;
It is an intentional untruth and a falsehood.
Lies is something intended or serving to convey a
false impression; imposture: an inaccurate or false
statement; a falsehood.
It also mean to speak falsely or utter untruth
knowingly, as with intent to deceive or to express
what is false; convey a false impression
(dictionary.reference.com).
6

7. Lie, Fraud, and Fraud Investigation
Meaning of Fraud
A generic term, embracing all multifarious means which
human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by
one individual to get advantage over another by false
suggestions or by suppression of truth, and includes all
surprise, trick, cunning, dissembling, and any unfair way
by which another is cheated (Dada, 2013).
Fraud is an intentional (deliberate) deception resulting in
injury to another person. Fraud is a deliberate
misrepresentation which causes another person to suffer
damages, usually monetary losses.
7

8. Fraud Investigation
Investigation
Investigation is a vital part of forensic accounting and
auditing process but only applied when the event or
transaction is beclouded.
It is carried out when lapse has been established to
ascertain who is responsible, the reason for the action
including the extent of damage if any.
It could be referred to as a detailed verification and
clarification of doubt about a
Investigation is a structured gathering of documentary
evidence and testimony to resolve an allegation of
improper activity transaction or event.
8

9. Fraud Investigation
Investigation
Interview and Interrogation are the two major
techniques in investigation that are used to elicit
responses from the suspect or accused.
Investigator (interviewer or interrogator) cannot usurp the
power of the court of competent jurisdiction by
pronouncing the suspect or accused guilty.
Investigator’s role is to gather evidence that can be used to
prove or disprove the act in issue (Fred, John, Joseph,
Brian, 2004, Oyedokun, 2014).
9

10. Fraud Investigation
Fraud Investigation
A fraud investigation tries to determine whether fraud has
taken place and tries to detect evidence of fraud has
occurred.
In most cases, fraud investigations are investigations of
white collar crime, which involves surveillance and careful
consideration of complicated financial records.
A fraud investigator may use surveillance, asset searches,
background checks, employee investigations, business
investigations, and other types of methods to get to the
bottom of a case.
10

11. Wednesday, February 18, 2015 11
Fraud Investigations & Govt. Agencies

12. Fraud Investigation
12

13. Risk & Risk Management
Risk
Risk is a probability or threat of damage, injury, liability,
loss, or any other negative occurrence that is caused by
external or internal vulnerabilities, and that may be
avoided through preemptive action (investopedia.com).
It is “an uncertain event or condition that, if it occurs, has
a positive or negative effect on a project’s objectives”
(PMBOK® Guide, 2013).
Two characteristics of a risk are:
1. It occurs from elements of uncertainty (probability).
2. It might have negative or positive effects on meeting the
objectives (impact).
13

14. Risk & Risk Management
Risk Management
Is the identification, analysis, assessment, control, and
avoidance, minimization, or elimination of unacceptable
risks.
Is the process of identification, analysis and either
acceptance or mitigation of uncertainty in decision-
making.
Risk assumption, risk avoidance, risk retention, risk
transfer, or any other strategy (or combination of
strategies) may be used in management of future events.
14

15. Risk & Risk Management
Risk Management
15

16. Risk & Risk Management
Risk Management thus includes:
i. planning risk management
ii.identifying and analyzing the risks
iii.preparing the response plan
iv.monitoring the risk
v.implementing the risk response if the risk occurs
16

17. Risk of Fraud Investigation
Investigators exposes themselves to a risk of litigation or loss of good
cases in court due to carelessness and improper handling of the
investigative materials such as the subject of the investigation,
evidence, collaborative witness etc.
These risks and the safeguards in terms of how the rights of the
individual could be protected, what to be observed by the anti-crime
agents, during the arrest, investigation and prosecution are discussed
under the following headings:
1. Individual Duties & Rights during Examinations
2. The Law Relating to Government Search and Seizure
3. Investigations in Private Actions
4. Rights and Obligations under Criminal Law
17

18. Risk of Fraud Investigation
Duties and Rights during Investigations:
1. Duty to Cooperate
2. Duty to preserve information relevant to litigation
3. Contractual Rights
4. Whistleblower Protections
5. Privacy Rights and Workplace Searches
i. Surveillance
ii. Reasonable Expectations of Privacy
iii. Reducing Expectations of Privacy
18

19. Risk of Fraud Investigation
The Law Relating to Government Search and Seizure:
a.Search Warrants
b.Reasonableness
c. Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement
 Consent Searches
 Evidence in Plain View
19

20. Risk of Fraud Investigation
Investigations in Private Actions:
1. Defamation- Libel; and Slander
2.Privacy Laws- general & specific:
a. Invasion of Privacy Torts
b. Intrusion into an Individual's Private Matters
c. Public Disclosure of Private Facts
d. Data Privacy
e. False Imprisonment
f. Malicious Prosecution
g. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
h. Wrongful Discharge
i. Legal Protections Regarding Interviews
20

21. Risk of Fraud Investigation
Rights and Obligations under Criminal Law:
i. The Right to Remain Silent
ii.Right to Counsel
iii.Limits on using Confessions in Criminal
Cases
iv.Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
21

22. Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
Court System
22

23. Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
Court System
A court is a tribunal, often a governmental institution,
with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between
parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil,
criminal, and administrative matters in accordance with
the rule of law.
Courts are the central means for dispute resolution, and it
is generally understood that all persons have an ability to
bring their claims before a court.
The rights of those accused of a crime include the right to
present a defence before a court.
23

24. Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
24

25. Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
Civil law and the Common law Courts
Civil law courts are based upon the judicial system in France,
Common law courts are based on the judicial system in England.
In most civil law jurisdictions, courts function under an inquisitorial
system.
In the common law system, most courts follow the adversarial system.
Procedural law governs the rules by which courts operate: civil
procedure for private disputes (for example); and criminal procedure
for violation of the criminal law.
International courts are created to resolve matters not covered by the
jurisdiction of national courts.
25

26. Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
Expert and Expert witness
26

27. Court System, Witnessing and Litigation Support
Expert and Expert witness
Expert is a person who is a specialist in a subject, often technical, who
may present his/her expert opinion without having been a witness to
any occurrence relating to the lawsuit or criminal case (Hill and Hill
2005).
A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience,
training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion
An expert witness is an expert who makes this knowledge and
experience available to a court (or other judicial or quasi-judicial
bodies, to help it understand the issues in a case and thereby reach a
sound and just decision
An expert witness is a witness who has knowledge beyond that of the
ordinary lay person enabling him/her to give testimony regarding an
issue that requires expertise to understand.
27

28. Fraud Investigation and Evidence
Fraud investigation process begins with a predication,
circumstances under which a reasonable, professionally
trained expert could believe that fraud is taking place.
Once there are such indications of fraud, the investigator
develops a hypothesis and looks for evidence to prove the
hypothesis.
Evidence is anything perceptible by the five senses, which
is invoked in the process of arguing a case.
Document, spoken recollection, data of various sort and
physical objects are all potentially evidence.
28

29. Fraud Investigation and Evidence
There are three basic forms, as distinguished from
types, of evidence:
Testimony;
Real; and
Demonstration
There are two types of admissible evidence:
Direct evidence
Circumstantial evidence
29

30. 30
Fraud Investigator in Court
A key piece of evidence is the report of the Fraud Investigator.
•The report should not be accusatory or conclusive as to guilt.
•It is critical to ensure that the tone of the report is not
inflammatory or prejudicial.
•The fraud trial can be a civil or a criminal trial.
•In either case, the role of the Fraud Investigator is to study relevant
materials documents, and the authoritative literature relating to the
case on hand.
•Direct and cross examination questions will be asked, and the
Fraud Investigator has the responsibility to answer these questions
clearly and concisely.

31. 31
Forensic Accountant in Court
In court, the Fraud Investigator can be:
• an expert witness,
•a consultant, or
•play other roles such as Trier of fact,
•special master,
•court-appointed expert,
•referee,
•arbitrator, or mediator

32. • This presentation had revealed that there is a need for the anti-fraud professionals to
conduct their fraud investigation by observing the rights guaranteed the suspect under the
applicable laws, and with the sound knowledge of the workings of the court.
• In fraud investigation exercise, effort must be made to determine whether fraud has taken
place or not and tries to gather evidence, if fraud has occurred as to when, how, and who.
• Fraud is considered as intentional misrepresentation of fact with the intent to deceive.
• In fraudulent activities, the perpetrator(s) gain while the victim lose.
• The risk of fraud investigation is key for any anti-fraud professionals to manage and
adequate knowledge of court and court processes is important in order to ensure that best
cases are not loss just because the carelessness on the part of the fraud investigator.
Conclusion

33. Thank you

34. Albrecht W. S (2006), Fraud Examination, Thomson South-Western Publishing, 2006.
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (2014): 2014 International Fraud Examiners
Manual
Albrecht W. S (2005). Business Fraud: (The Enron Problem) Brigham Young
University, 2005 by the AICPA
Bradford (2013) Auditing vs. Forensic Accounting Analysis retrieved from
http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/auditing-vs-forensic-accounting-analysis-12493.html; on
March 19, 2014
Broad J. (2014) Risk-Management-Framework retrieved from
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/feature/Risk-Management-Framework on March 19,
2014
Crubley, Heiger and Smith (2003), Forensic and Investigative Accounting, CC Publishing
Daniel Williams, (2011), Fraud Risk Management a Holistic Approach: Being a lecture
delivered at year 2011 ACFE Canadian Fraud Conference in Toronto November 28, 2011
Enyi, E.P (2008): Detecting Causes of Variances in Operational Outputs of Manufacturing
Organizations: A Forensic Accounting Investigation Approach. Downloaded from
Hill G.N and K. T. Hill (2008) Forensic Accounting: Hopwood, Leiner and Young (2009);
McGraw-Hill International.
R. Hayes, R. Dassen, A. Schilder, and P. Wallage (2005); Principles of auditing: An
Introduction to International Standards on Auditing (Second Edition); Prentice Hall New
York Pages 44:47
Richter L. (2010); Financial Statement Audit vs. Forensic Accounting; retrieved from
http://www.brighthub.com/office/finance/articles/81471.aspx on March 20, 2014
References
Oyedokun Godwin Emmanuel

35. Skalak S.T, Golden T, Clayton M, & Pill J., (2011) 2nd
Ed: A Guide to Forensic Accounting
Investigation: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. USA- pg. 95.
Oyedokun, G.E (2013). Audit, investigation and forensic accounting: Similarities and
differences. Being a lecture delivered at the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria’s
forensic accounting certification programme
Oyedokun, G. E (
2014), Forensic Accounting and Investigation: A means of Curbing Money
Laundering Activities; Being a paper presented at the Nigerian Students’ Economic and
Finance Summit (NISEF) 2014 of Obafemi Awolowo University’s Chapter of the Nigeria
University Accounting Students’ Association (NUASA) on March 28, 2014
Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses up Rule 703. Bases of an Expert’s Opinion
Testimony retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702 on 23/09/2014
UK Register of Expert Witnesses Little Book Series, (2008) Extract from Getting Started as
an
Expert Witness, number three in the UK Register of Expert Witnesses Little Book Series
(ISBN 1-905926-04-6, 2008)
Williams D., (2011), Fraud Risk Management a Holistic Approach: Being a lecture
delivered at year 2011 ACFE Canadian Fraud Conference in Toronto November 28, 2011
Zysman, A., (2004). Forensic accounting demystified. World investigators network standard
practice for investigative and forensic accounting engagement? Canadian Institute of
Chartered Accountants.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/expert+witness
http://definitions.uslegal.com/e/expert-witness/
http://www.ewi.org.uk/membership_directory/whatisanexpertwitness
References
Oyedokun Godwin Emmanuel