A “think piece” on intelligence, investigation and prosecution
| Date | 03 July 2017 |
| Pages | 449-460 |
| Published date | 03 July 2017 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-03-2017-0018 |
| Author | David Fitzpatrick |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & Finance,Financial risk/company failure,Financial crime |
A “think piece” on intelligence,
investigation and prosecution
David Fitzpatrick
Gilt Chambers, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to expose the failure of the criminal justice system of England and
Wales to provide an effective response to widespread fraud and to point to sources from which a new doctrine
may be created. The author’s approach draws on public sources, in particular, recent Home Ofce
publications, the work of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee and studies undertaken by the
Mayor of London’s ofces in 2014/2015.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper uses a critical assessment of the criminal justice system
based on the author’s own experience as a fraud prosecutor.
Findings –Among the ndings is that, while the failings of the current system have been apparent for some
years, the extent and depth of the same failings have not been publicly realised, nor sufciently acknowledged
by the authorities. It has become obvious that the traditional response of the criminal justice system, when
employed against fraud, will fail for want of anything corresponding to the resources required. A new doctrine
will emerge as the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is revised and more exibly employed. The Criminal Finances
Bill also holds much promise, in particular, with its new offences akin to money laundering and the provision
of powers of investigation at a signicantly lower level of command among investigators. However, there
remains an apparent reluctance in law enforcement to explain its methodology or to support reform, which
would allow a fuller sharing of intelligence and appreciations of threats posed by fraud derived from
intelligence with the nancial services sector and the victim public.
Originality/value –The value of the paper is derived from the author’s long experience as a fraud
prosecutor and as an adviser to the government, on fraud and organised crime, in a closely related jurisdiction
with similar problems, but where greater success has been achieved, namely, Hong Kong.
Keywords Fraud, Money laundering, Prosecution, Criminal nances bill
Paper type Viewpoint
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to put forward the view that in England and Wales, the
traditional response to fraud, including fraud and cyber-enabled fraud, has failed so
completely that a new doctrine must be adopted. The doctrine should be driven in no small
part by information gathered by the nancial sector and the intelligence then derived there
by the authorities being then disseminated to that sector, so it may act with greater insight,
and also to the private sector which might then represent fraud victims. At present, the
assistance provided by the authorities that includes the Police, The National Crime Agency
and the Crown Prosecution Service to the typical fraud victim and to those who might
prevent fraud and money laundering is scant. Information and intelligence so derived and
relating to criminal activity, if it exists, is kept in-house. Condentiality and data protection
laws may have stied new initiatives. Things may be about to change.
The Great British fraud plague
The UK has been in recent years, and continues to be, plagued by frauds of all descriptions.
A recent estimate of the loss to the British economy from fraud is approximately £125 billion
annually[1]. Nonetheless, unless a fraud is exceptionally large or vitally threatening to the
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-0790.htm
Think piece
449
Journalof Financial Crime
Vol.24 No. 3, 2017
pp.449-460
©Emerald Publishing Limited
1359-0790
DOI 10.1108/JFC-03-2017-0018
To continue reading
Request your trial