Wednesday, January 27, 2021
Corporate Compliance Insights
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Articles
    • See All Articles
    • NEW: COVID-Related
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Leadership and Career
  • Vendor News
  • Jobs
  • Events
    • Webinars & Events
    • Submit an Event
  • Downloads
    • eBooks
    • Whitepapers
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Articles
    • See All Articles
    • NEW: COVID-Related
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Leadership and Career
  • Vendor News
  • Jobs
  • Events
    • Webinars & Events
    • Submit an Event
  • Downloads
    • eBooks
    • Whitepapers
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
Corporate Compliance Insights
Home Fraud

White Collar Crime: Reading Minds

by Michael Volkov
April 2, 2014
in Fraud
White Collar Crime: Reading Minds

This article was republished with permission from Michael Volkov’s Corruption, Crime & Compliance.

The difference between white collar and violent crime usually comes down to this: in most cases of violent crime, the actor’s state of mind is not at issue; the cases often center on whether the specific person charged was the one who killed/shot/assaulted the victim.  If he or she was the actor, then the issue may turn to self-defense.  (I know this is simplistic, but grant me a little leeway to make my point).

In most cases of white collar crime, no one disputes the conduct, it is the surrounding intent.

The actor may have taken someone out for a lavish dinner, handed them a Rolex watch and then walked away after a nice evening together.

Did the actor give these gifts with “corrupt” intent in order to improperly influence the recipient? Here, it is the state of the actor’s mind at issue.

White collar crime boils down to reading the actor’s mind.  Whether it is bribery, illegal gratuities or some other intent-driven crime, the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the act occurred and the actor had the requisite intent.

Prosecutors look for “indicia” of corrupt intent.  In many cases, the government does not have direct evidence of the actor’s state of mind.  The actor did not say, “I am giving this to you to make sure you award me the contract.”

Instead, prosecutors have to collect evidence from which a reasonable person can infer the actor’s intent.

That is why bribery is a hard crime to prove.  You have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the actor had the requisite intent.  The defense often can point to other explanations for the actor’s conduct and will bring in direct and circumstantial evidence to support that alternative explanation.

In the FCPA context, the government’s burden is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the actor had “corrupt intent.”   Even if the government offers evidence the actor provided gifts, meals, entertainment and other benefits to the foreign official, the question is whether the actor do so with corrupt intent.  To meet the burden of proof, the government will cite surrounding circumstances – e.g. the pendency of a contract award, the importance of the contract to a company, the actor’s desire for a contract.

This is the reason I advise companies to devise systems to document legitimate, good faith reasons for their actions.  Such evidence provides a contemporaneous record of what the company is thinking and the good faith reasons for its actions.   This evidence “negates” any suggestion of corrupt intent.

The government’s burden is significantly greater when it has to prove corrupt intent beyond a reasonable doubt, and overcome the documented evidence showing that the company acted in good faith to comply with the law.

I often short-hand this strategy by saying, “If you act in good faith, and document the reasons for your actions, no one will go to jail.”


Tags: tone at the top
Previous Post

FCPA Year in Review 2013, Part 3

Next Post

Five Ways to Separate Fact from Fantasy

Michael Volkov

Michael-Volkov-leclairryan Michael Volkov is the CEO of The Volkov Law Group LLC, where he provides compliance, internal investigation and white collar defense services.  He can be reached at mvolkov@volkovlaw.com. Michael has extensive experience representing clients on matters involving the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the UK Bribery Act, money laundering, Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC), export controls, sanctions and International Traffic in Arms, False Claims Act, Congressional investigations, online gambling and regulatory enforcement issues. Michael served for more than 17 years as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the District of Columbia; for five years as the Chief Crime and Terrorism Counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Chief Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Counsel for the Senate and House Judiciary Committees; and as a Trial Attorney in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Michael also maintains a well-known blog: Corruption Crime & Compliance, which is frequently cited by anti-corruption professionals and professionals in the compliance industry.

Related Posts

businessman holding portfolio with cash spilling out

How WFH Will Accelerate Financial Misconduct

November 23, 2020
The Best Questions to Ask During a Fraud Interview

The Best Questions to Ask During a Fraud Interview

November 17, 2020
Airliner in flight

Airline Services Limited Fined $2.9M by Serious Fraud Office For Failure to Prevent Bribery

October 30, 2020
artificial intelligence

Using AI and ML to Detect Corruption and Fraud Schemes

October 22, 2020
Next Post
Five Ways to Separate Fact from Fantasy

Five Ways to Separate Fact from Fantasy

Access realtime data
Dynamic Risk Assessments with Workiva

Special Coverage

Special COVID page graphic

Jump to a Topic:

anti-corruption anti-money laundering/AML Artificial Intelligence/A.I. automation banks board of directors board risk oversight bribery CCPA/California Consumer Privacy Act Cloud Compliance communications management Coronavirus/COVID-19 corporate culture crisis management cyber crime cyber risk data analytics data breach data governance decision-making diversity DOJ due diligence fcpa enforcement actions financial crime GDPR GRC HIPAA information security internal audit KYC/know your customer machine learning monitoring regtech reputation risk risk assessment Sanctions SEC social media risk supply chain technology third party risk management tone at the top training whistleblowing
No Result
View All Result

Privacy Policy

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS Feed

Category

  • CCI Press
  • Compliance
  • Compliance Podcasts
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data Privacy
  • eBooks
  • Ethics
  • FCPA
  • Featured
  • Financial Services
  • Fraud
  • Governance
  • GRC Vendor News
  • HR Compliance
  • Internal Audit
  • Leadership and Career
  • Opinion
  • Resource Library
  • Risk
  • Uncategorized
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • Whitepapers

© 2019 Corporate Compliance Insights

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
  • Articles
  • Vendor News
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Whitepapers
  • eBooks
  • Events
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe

© 2019 Corporate Compliance Insights