Fraud Case Analysis Zarmoon Inshanalli

Added on - 16 May 2020

  • 4


  • 1226


  • 24


  • 0


Showing pages 1 to 2 of 4 pages
Fraud Case Analysis-Zarmoon InshanalliAccounting 350 – Case Discussion AssignmentFraud Case Analysis-Zarmoon InshanalliPrepared by Student nameInstitution NameInitial posting; Zarmoon InshanalliA)Facts of the CaseOn 7thApril 2017, Ms. Inshanalli was sentenced to three and a half years as apunishment for engaging in fraudulent activities[ CITATION RvI17 \l 2057 ].Prior to thejudgement She had pleaded guilty to the offences on during one of the courthearings.In her judgement Justice Peter C. West revealed that the offender had in theprevious years participated in several fraudulent activities which even included goingagainst a court order that prohibited her from taking any form of accounting jobswhile 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 notauthorised each cheque was of an amount between $ 1456 to $ 5839. She worked asa bookkeeper during her employment tenure with the victim and took theopportunity to forge the signature of Gerard Waslens as a way of authenticating herfrauds.Ms. Inshanalli had a history of defrauding unsuspecting clients and employers whoput their trusts in her. On May 2004 she was given a conditional sentence fordefrauding 407 ETR an amount totalling $750000 while working for them inNewmarket. The same behaviours were replicated between the year 2010 and 2012when she defrauded her employer Sherwood Innovations of $141000. In many ofthe cases the offender took an opportunity of the trust the employers put on her asa bookkeeper to steal from them.B)Theoretic AnalysisIn trying to understand the mindset of fraudsters several theories have beenexplored. The aim is to gain an insight of how and why fraudulent activities occur. Inthis analysis some of the theories will be highlighted.
Fraud Case Analysis-Zarmoon InshanalliPart 1: Traditional TheoriesThe Fraud TriangleThis is a combination of three situations which when converged can make an honestperson turn to fraudulent activities[ CITATION The \l 2057 ]. The factors are:i.Perceived pressure; this is the primary motivation behind the fraud. Thetrusted person sometimes experiences financial issues that she/he may notbe able to solve in a legal manner hence consideration of fraud.ii.Perceived opportunity; The trust put in the individuals normally give them anavenue to still by abusing their trust.iii.Rationalization; fraudsters are normally not criminals by career hence have apersonal justification for carrying out the offence[CITATION JGl04 \l 2057 ].Ms. Inshanalli had very many previous records of fraud from the year 2004 to2016. In almost all the companies she had been employed in she found achance to breach her contract and steal money from them. despite thenumerous cases surrounding her during her trials she pleaded guilty of theoffences which showed signs of remorse, in addition she went ahead to makea voluntary restitution payment. She blamed the pressure to a company herfriends to casinos and her gambling addiction as the reason behind heractions[ CITATION RvI17 \l 2057 ]. The gambling addictionhas been proven bythe court when it was discovered that she had initially been put underpsychiatric care to assist he overcome it.The Fraud ScaleThis theory was introduced in 1984 and it replaces the fraud triangle idea ofrationalization with ethics and integrity[ CITATION ACF \l 2057 ].A person’sintegrity is judged by the commitment to adhere to ethical standards indecision making. In such cases the people rarely engage in fraud. By assessingthe individual’s integrity, it's therefore possible to gauge the fraud scale.When an individual with low integrity are exposed to high opportunity andhigh pressure their chances of engaging in fraud becomes very likely.The issue of integrity is reflected in the case of Ms. Inshanalli. She goesagainst the court order to sat away from the bookkeeping jobs, in additionshe is repeatedly involved in fraud in the various companies she worked for
You’re reading a preview

To View Complete Document

Become a Desklib Library Member.
Subscribe to our plans

Download This Document