Use the link to answer the following questions:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/12/AR2009091202440.html

1) Explain how the fraud triangle applies in this case with Harriette Walters?

2) What pieces of evidence would investigators have utilized to support their claim that the accused intended to commit fraud? Why?

3) What red flags may have been evident to others in the D.C tax office and to the investigators?

4) If you were an investor in this case, who are the relevant parties that you would have wanted to interview?

5) What interview techniques did the investigators try? What worked?

6) What recommendations would you have made to the D.C Tax office in order to help prevent this type of fraud in the future?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 The fraud triangle consists of 3 vital elements all of which must be proved in order to accuse som... View the full answer