Episode F22 — Victim Carelessness Is Not a Defence

Episode Summary

This episode explains why a victim's carelessness, trust, embarrassment, or failure to detect deception does not automatically excuse fraud. Fraudsters often argue that the victim should have asked more questions, checked the documents, refused the transaction, or protected themselves better. Canadian fraud law does not reward dishonest conduct simply because the victim was trusting, vulnerable, or slow to discover the truth. The episode focuses on the accused person's conduct, the victim's belief, the economic interest affected, and the connection between deception and deprivation or risk. It also explains why this issue matters in romance fraud, insurance fraud, online scams, consumer fraud, and cases involving institutional victims. For investigators, the practical lesson is to avoid victim-blaming and instead document what was represented, what the victim believed, what changed financially, and what the accused knew.

What You'll Learn

• • Why victim carelessness is not automatically a defence
• • How victim trust and reliance fit into fraud analysis
• • Why institutional victims can still be defrauded
• • How investigators should document victim belief and economic risk

Key Investigator Takeaways

• • Do not dismiss a file because the victim "should have known better"
• • Focus on the accused person's dishonest conduct, not victim perfection
• • Build the file around representation, belief, financial action, and accused knowledge

Cases Discussed

Visual Mind Map

Transcript

Related Episodes