Podcast Library

This episode focuses on the actus reus of fraud — 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.

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.

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.

This episode explains the practical and legal differences between false pretences under s. 362 and fraud under s. 380. False pretences focuses on a false representation of an existing fact made with intent to induce the victim to part with property, while fraud captures a broader range of dishonest conduct — deceit, falsehood, or other fraudulent means — that causes deprivation or risk of deprivation. The episode helps investigators decide when each offence fits the facts, when they should be charged together, and how the evidence requirements differ.

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.