European l Accounting Auditing And Finance -Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The European L Accounting Auditing And Finance? Answer: Introducation On 7th April 2017, Ms. Inshanalli was sentenced to three and a half years as a punishment for engaging in fraudulent activities (R. v. Inshanalli, 2017). Prior to the judgement She had pleaded guilty to the offences on during one of the court hearings. In her judgement Justice Peter C. West revealed that the offender had in the previous years participated in several fraudulent activities which even included going against a court order that prohibited her from taking any form of accounting jobs while on probation from the previous charges. Ms Inshanalli was employed by the victim between April 2014 and January 2016, during the period she fraudulently wrote herself 134 cheques which were not authorised each cheque was of an amount between $ 1456 to $ 5839. She worked as a bookkeeper during her employment tenure with the victim and took the opportunity to forge the signature of Gerard Waslens as a way of authenticating her frauds. Ms. Inshanalli had a history of defrauding unsuspecting clients and employers who put their trusts in her. On May 2004 she was given a conditional sentence for defrauding 407 ETR an amount totalling $750000 while working for them in Newmarket. The same behaviours were replicated between the year 2010 and 2012 when she defrauded her employer Sherwood Innovations of $141000. In many of the cases the offender took an opportunity of the trust the employers put on her as a bookkeeper to steal from them. Theoretic Analysis In trying to understand the mindset of fraudsters several theories have been explored. The aim is to gain an insight of how and why fraudulent activities occur. In this analysis some of the theories will be highlighted. The Fraud Triangle This is a combination of three situations which when converged can make an honest person turn to fraudulent activities (The Fraud Triangle, n.d.). The factors are: Perceived pressure; this is the primary motivation behind the fraud. The trusted person sometimes experiences financial issues that she/he may not be able to solve in a legal manner hence consideration of fraud. Perceived opportunity; The trust put in the individuals normally give them an avenue to still by abusing their trust. Rationalization; fraudsters are normally not criminals by career hence have a personal justification for carrying out the offence (Johnson, 2004). Ms. Inshanalli had very many previous records of fraud from the year 2004 to 2016. In almost all the companies she had been employed in she found a chance to breach her contract and steal money from them. despite the numerous cases surrounding her during her trials she pleaded guilty of the offences which showed signs of remorse, in addition she went ahead to make a voluntary restitution payment. She blamed the pressure to a company her friends to casinos and her gambling addiction as the reason behind her actions (R. v. Inshanalli, 2017). The gambling addiction has been proven by the court when it was discovered that she had initially been put under psychiatric care to assist he overcome it. The Fraud Scale This theory was introduced in 1984 and it replaces the fraud triangle idea of rationalization with ethics and integrity (ACFI Fraud Manual 8th Edition. ). A persons integrity is judged by the commitment to adhere to ethical standards in decision making. In such cases the people rarely engage in fraud. By assessing the individuals integrity, it's therefore possible to gauge the fraud scale. When an individual with low integrity are exposed to high opportunity and high pressure their chances of engaging in fraud becomes very likely. The issue of integrity is reflected in the case of Ms. Inshanalli. She goes against the court order to sat away from the bookkeeping jobs, in addition she is repeatedly involved in fraud in the various companies she worked for (R. v. Inshanalli, 2017). With this we can claim that Ms. Inshanalli is a person of low integrity and give little space for ethics. The judge decision to put her in jail rather than on probation therefore seems justified. Part 2: Illuminating Rationalization with Behavioural Science The rational theory is applicable in criminology to try explaining why individual indulge in criminal behaviours. As the case with fraud triangle its is characterised by three main assumptions; offenders regard themselves as people, people tend to optimise their objectives and people have self-interests. The rationale behind the rationalization theory is that crimes are selected based on their advantages over the costs. should the outcome of a crime outweigh the consequence then the crime will be committed. In the Inshanalli case the objective was to satisfy the gambling desire. The offenders previous convictions were light, and she even managed to maneuver and get another job regardless of her probation status. To her the cost of her crimes was minimal just being kept on probations and so she chose to continue exploiting her employers. As per the rationalization theory the low cost of the actions triggered further frauds. Conclusion The fraud theories discussed above are all geared towards highlighting the rationale behind criminal behavior. Ms. Inshanalli is presented with an opportunity as a bookkeeper. She had a superb knowledge of accounting which she could easily use to cover up her behaviours. In addition to this the offender had a gambling addiction and the urge to accompany friends to casinos these factors contributed to the occurrence of the frauds. As per the rationalisation theory the offender had a past record of frauds which were classified as massive with heavy consequences but ended up attracting minor charges. With this the cost of fraud was lowered to the point that the benefits she derives outweighed them. To fully understand the fraud cases its essential to identify the nature of the fraudster to optimise the illustrations of the theories in explaining the behaviours (Gbegi, 2013). References ACFI Fraud Manual 8th Edition. . (n.d.). Association of Certified Forensic Investigators of Canada. Gbegi, J. A. (2013). The New Fraud Diamond Model How Can It Help Forensic Accountants in Fraud Investigations In Nigeria? . European Journal of Accounting Auditing and Finance , 133. Johnson, J. G. (2004). Southeast Decision Science Institute. Retrieved from The Fraud Diamond vs. Fraud Triangle Analytics: Evaluating Capability as a Modification for Auditing Unstructured Enterprise Data: https://www.sedsi.org/2013_Conference/proc/proc/P121012004.pdf Inshanalli, 2017 ONCJ 234 (Central East Region: Oshawa 16-33970 April 07, 2017). The Fraud Triangle. (n.d.). Retrieved from The Association of Fraud Examiners : https://www.acfe.com/fraud-triangle.asp