Reflective Writing Task – Blog #3
I agree with the
statement that it is extremely important for forensic accountants to be
familiar with the law. Public interests are at threat if forensic
accountants are ignorant of the rules of evidence.
I recently read an
article about the ASIC vs Rich case that was settled in 2009. During the
proceedings of this case the Supreme Court of NSW identified a number of issues
regarding the expert reports, specifically a report prepared by Paul Carter (a
forensic accounting partner at PWC). The report prepared by Carter was deemed
inadmissible for the purposes of the relevant proceedings, (Paul, 2017).
Carter failed to “disclose the real factual basis and true
reasoning process of the opinions expressed was inadmissible because”, (Small,
2005). This is a clear example of how a forensic accountant was
ignorant of the rules of evidence.
There are two elements
that encompasses a forensic accounts role, investigation and litigation
support. A forensic account must be able to gather evidence, ensuring
this evidence is not mishandled (for example distorting original copies), and
then be able to present this evidence to a court of law. The legal
requirements that compromise the role of a forensic accountant can sometimes
stand as the difference between a guilty and non-guilty verdict.
References
Paul, I. (2017).
Forensic Accounting Reports - Sourcing of Information and Independence. FindLaw
Australia. Retrieved from http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/693/forensic-accounting-reports-8211-sourcing-of-infor.aspx
Small, S. (2005).
Admissibility of expert evidence. Australian Government
Solicitor. Retrieved from http://www.ags.gov.au/publications/express-law/el22.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment