Episode F18 — The Dupe Defence: Innocent Participant or Fraudster?

Episode Summary

This episode examines the "dupe defence" in fraud investigations — the claim that an accused person was merely used by others and did not knowingly participate in the fraud. It explains that not every person connected to a fraudulent transaction is automatically a fraudster. Some people may be innocent intermediaries, employees, nominees, account holders, or participants who did not understand the broader scheme. At the same time, the law requires investigators to examine role, knowledge, benefit, repeated conduct, suspicious circumstances, and whether the accused person's explanation is consistent with the evidence. The episode helps investigators separate innocent participation from knowing assistance, wilful blindness, or dishonest involvement. Its practical value is showing how to test the accused person's claim of innocence against records, communications, money flow, instructions, benefit, and the timeline of events.

What You'll Learn

• • What the dupe defence means in fraud investigations
• • How innocent participation differs from knowing involvement
• • Why role, benefit, and knowledge are central to the analysis
• • How investigators can test an accused person's explanation

Key Investigator Takeaways

• • Do not assume every participant knew about the fraud
• • Test the dupe explanation against records, money flow, communications, and benefit
• • Focus on what the accused knew, suspected, ignored, or deliberately avoided knowing

Cases Discussed

Visual Mind Map

Transcript

Related Episodes