Podcast Library

Expert audio lessons on Canadian criminal law, leading cases, and investigative practice.

Episode F8 โ€” Fraud Actus Reus: Deceit, Falsehood, and Other Fraudulent Means cover art
Episode F8 ยท 34 min
Episode F8 โ€” Fraud Actus Reus: Deceit, Falsehood, and Other Fraudulent Means
The prohibited conduct side of fraud

This episode focuses on the actus reus of fraud โ€” the prohibited conduct and its consequences. Under s. 380, fraud may be committed by deceit, falsehood, or other fraudulent means, and the prohibited act must be connected to deprivation or risk of deprivation. The episode explains the difference between direct deceit, false statements, and broader dishonest conduct, and why investigators need to identify exactly what the accused did and how that conduct caused loss or risk.

FraudEvidenceInvestigator Lessons
Listen / View Episode โ†’
Episode F9 โ€” Fraud Mens Rea: What Did the Accused Know? cover art
Episode F9 ยท 34 min
Episode F9 โ€” Fraud Mens Rea: What Did the Accused Know?
Proving the accused's subjective knowledge

This episode focuses on the mens rea of fraud: what the accused knew. Under the modern fraud framework, the Crown must prove subjective knowledge of the prohibited act and subjective knowledge that the act could cause deprivation or risk of deprivation. The Crown does not need to prove the accused intended the victim to suffer the final loss in every case. The key issue is whether the accused knew the conduct was dishonest and knew it could put another person's economic interests at risk.

FraudEvidenceInvestigator Lessons
Listen / View Episode โ†’
Episode F10 โ€” Deprivation in Fraud: Actual Loss, Risk of Loss, and Economic Prejudice cover art
Episode F10 ยท 34 min
Episode F10 โ€” Deprivation in Fraud: Actual Loss, Risk of Loss, and Economic Prejudice
Proving deprivation โ€” including risk and prejudice

This episode explains the deprivation element of fraud. Deprivation can include actual economic loss, but it can also include risk of loss or prejudice to an economic interest. The major fraud cases make clear that investigators must pay attention to both completed loss and risk-based harm. Deprivation is proven through bank records, transaction history, contracts, invoices, business records, victim statements, and expert evidence where appropriate.

FraudEvidenceInvestigator Lessons
Listen / View Episode โ†’
Episode F15 โ€” Fraud Investigations: Evidence, Red Flags, and Practical Lessons cover art
Episode F15 ยท 42 min
Episode F15 โ€” Fraud Investigations: Evidence, Red Flags, and Practical Lessons
From complaint to chargeable fraud case

This episode brings the fraud series together and focuses on practical investigation. It explains how investigators move from a complaint to evidence, from evidence to legal elements, and from legal elements to a chargeable fraud case. It summarizes the core fraud framework โ€” dishonest conduct, deprivation or risk of deprivation, the accused's knowledge, and the evidence needed to prove each element โ€” and connects fraud investigations to identity offences, false documents, business records, banking evidence, digital evidence, and proceeds of crime issues. Section 380 remains the central offence, while sections such as 402.2, 403, 362, 366, 368, 380.1, and 462.31 may become relevant depending on the facts.

FraudEvidenceInvestigator Lessons
Listen / View Episode โ†’
Episode F35 โ€” Fraud Proof Toolkit: Jurisdiction, Documents, Parties, Attempts, Victims, and Charges cover art
Episode F35 ยท 32 min
Episode F35 โ€” Fraud Proof Toolkit: Jurisdiction, Documents, Parties, Attempts, Victims, and Charges
Jurisdiction, Documents, Parties, Attempts, Victims, and Charges

This episode brings the fraud foundation series together by focusing on how investigators turn a fraud complaint into a court-ready file. After understanding dishonesty, deprivation, mens rea, false documents, victim reliance, non-disclosure, diversion, and risk-based loss, the final task is proof organization. The episode explains the practical building blocks of a fraud file: jurisdiction, identity, charge value, victim or public economic interest, dishonest means, deprivation or risk, causation, business records, ownership or value, parties, attempts, and accused knowledge. It also explains why a fraud file is not proven by simply calling something a "scam." Investigators must connect the story to admissible records, witness evidence, transaction history, and a clear theory of how the dishonest conduct caused economic risk or prejudice. This episode serves as a practical checklist for building organized, focused, Crown-review-ready fraud investigations.

FraudEvidenceInvestigator Lessons
Listen / View Episode โ†’