Prosecuting Fraud (From Fraud Prevention and Control, P 1-8, 2000, Australian Institute of Criminology -- See NCJ-186569)

• NCJ Number: 186582
• Author(s): Damian Bugg
• Date Published: January 2001
• Length: 8 pages
• Sale Source: Australian Institute of Criminology
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Instructional Material
• Language: English
• Country: Australia
• Note: Paper presented at the Fraud Prevention and Control Conference convened by the Australian Institute of Criminology on August 24-25, 2000.

Annotation

This paper discusses why the prosecution of fraud is difficult in Australia, what is involved in the effective prosecution of fraud, and reform measures that could enhance such prosecutions.

Abstract

Successful prosecutions of fraud are difficult because of limited investigative resources that make the obtaining of evidence in complex frauds difficult to obtain. This can cause problems associated with prosecution delays. Further, well-resourced defendants can pose legal challenges that obstruct the legal process. Also, complex fraud cases present problems for juries. The effective prosecution of fraud should contain the following elements: early presentation to the prosecutor of the investigator's brief; full prosecution disclosure to the defense; the early engagement of capable and responsible defense and prosecuting counsel; a prosecution charging policy that uses a minimalist approach but also reflects the true criminality of the alleged law violations; a pretrial hearing that includes the cross-examination of essential witnesses; the resolution of legal issues before trial; judicial oversight of completed pretrial discussions; an efficient trial process under the control of the judge; and an identifiable sentencing discount for early guilty pleas. This paper concludes by listing the issues for reform considered by an Australian Working Group appointed to consider the problems to the criminal justice system presented by complex white collar crime.