Reference no: EM133206006

Interview Evaluation

You are a forensic accountant and have been engaged to investigate a case of fraud at Woods Company, which runs a chain of wholesale restaurant supply stores in the Austin area.

You were first contacted by Sonya Grimm, Woods' controller. She tells you that she's discovered that one of several employees working in the main office has been stealing blank company checks. The company checkbook is normally kept locked in the desk of the CFO's secretary. Only the secretary, the CFO, two accountants, and the company janitor normally have access to the CFO's office suite.

Sonya discovered the problem in a routine reconciliation of the bank statement against the cash disbursements ledger. The reconciliation revealed two paid checks in the amounts of $1,324 and $1,726, both made payable to and cashed by a Marco Gomez. Sonya's follow-up investigation revealed that both checks had been cashed in the drive-thru window of Woods' bank, and on both occasions the teller had written Marco Gomez's driver's license number and address on the back of the checks.

Sonya reported the two checks to the check fraud division of the local district attorney's office. Two weeks later, she received a call from one of the investigators. The investigator had visited the residence of Marco Gomez, only to find that the man had been very ill and immobile for several months. It was clear that Marco Gomez was the victim of identity theft and had nothing to do with cashing the stolen checks.

"We see this all the time," said the investigator. "We have the videos of the person cashing the checks. He was obviously wearing a wig and sunglasses. He also knew exactly how to position his head to minimize his exposure to the bank's surveillance camera."

"What about a license plate number?" I asked "Did that show up on the video?"

"Yes, but it was unreadable. This guy is a real professional. It appears that he put some kind of reflective coating on the license plate to confuse the camera."

Sonya was really frustrated. Her preliminary conversations with the bank lead her to believe that Woods would have to eat the losses because a company employee was obviously involved in the scheme. Even worse, she had the strong feeling that the problem would happen again. There was really no way to keep the bank from cashing the checks, and next time the losses could be even higher.

Sonya discussed the problem with Harry Winkler, the CEO. He strongly insisted that she focus on catching the crook and that doing so was more important than taking a chance that the theft might happen again. She replied that she wanted to place a hidden surveillance camera in the CFO's office, but Harry refused to permit her to do so. He was afraid of the possible consequences of spying on the CFO, whose family connections were important to Woods' survival.

"No, I want you to gather evidence from what you have already," he said. "Hire a professional forensic accountant, and let the accountant provide some evidence as to who did it. If that evidence is good, then I'll consider installing a spy camera."

Your preliminary investigation involves a handwriting analysis of the checks. Although you're not a handwriting expert, you quickly realize that there is no obvious correspondence between any of the handwriting on the bad checks to the handwriting of any of the employee suspects. You conclude that your only hope is to interview each of the suspects and perhaps obtain a confession.

You decide to conduct your first interview with Marla Ladronia, the CFO's secretary. Both you and Sonya consider her to be the prime suspect. You conduct your interview in an empty conference room. Marla sits directly across from you on the other side of the table.

"Hello, I'm Bob Baker," you say to her. "I'm a certified fraud examiner from Wilson and Larson Accounting Firm. I need to ask you only a few questions."

Maria stiffens.

"Please don't worry. You aren't being accused of doing anything wrong. I'm just here for a routine investigation."

You stiffen up to match her body language, trying to put her at ease. It doesn't seem to help, and she only looks more nervous. You wonder if she is acting guilty.

"Do you know what I'm investigating?" you ask her.

She shakes her head back and forth, still sitting straight up in her chair like a lamppost. "Someone stole checks from your desk," you tell her.

"Are you a policeman?" she asks.

You try to speak n a calm and reassuring voice. "No, just an accountant."

She begins to cry but remains upright and stiff.

"Why are you crying?" you ask.

"Because I don't want to lose my job. I have two kids in private school, and my husband I can barely make ends meet."

You decide that she's acting very guilty, so you decide to get right to the heart of the matter.

"Ok," you say. "We do have information that points straight to you. You might as well confess. Help me out, and I'll see if I can convince your boss not to press charges."

She becomes very quiet, and for a time, you hear only the hum of the overhead florescent lights. Then she finally speaks, "You're accusing me. I want a lawyer, and I'm not going to talk to you. And I'll sue both you and my company if anything bad happens to me." She gets up and walks out of the room.

Interview Evaluation

1) How well did you handle the interview?

2) How well did you handle the overall investigation?

3) What could you have done differently?

4) What is your assessment of Marla's responses?