|
|
 |
|
It is important to ensure that the integrity of any evidence of a suspected fraud is preserved at an early stage. An investigation and prosecution will rely on documents that are instrumental to the fraud being available to a court in their original form.
- Papers and other documents, especially those key items around which the fraud revolves should be preserved in the condition that the fraudster left them, if at all possible. This can be achieved by placing them in clear plastic bags or envelopes so that anyone who needs to do so can examine them visually without obliterating forensic evidence. A note should be kept of anyone who handled the document in its unpreserved state, so that any fingerprints can be eliminated from the fraudster’s.
- When a computer has been used in the commission of a fraud - perhaps an operator is dishonest, or an accounting system has been attacked - there is potential for much useful evidence to be obtained. As with documents, steps should be taken by a competent person (and bearing in mind all possible suspects) to preserve this evidence. The basic step would be not to use the computer until it can be forensically examined. If that is not practicable, any suspect files should be saved using a backup routine. Do not open or examine any suspect files yourself. If a computer is connected to a server it is also important to preserve a log of net server traffic. Contacting the police for advice at an early stage should ensure that evidence is not lost.
- A record should be kept of any other significant facts and events, for example, relevant conversations, how suspicions were aroused, chronological sequences of events, names of potential witneses and so on.
You may be in a position to confront a person who is suspected of the fraud and to challenge them about their involvement or knowledge. Do bear in mind that there are rules that apply to anyone in authority - not just the police - who interviews a person as a suspect of a crime. Confessions and significant admissions by a suspect - whether verbally or in writing - can be rendered evidentially worthless if not made in compliance with the rules governing the subject. Police officers are trained in these rules and the interviewing of suspects should be conducted by the police or a trained, competent individual.
|
|
