ACFE Updated CFE-Investigation Exam Questions and Answers by kaden

Fraud examiners must not opine on guilt, innocence, intent, or disposition. Reports should focus on facts and expert conclusions within their field. The Manual stresses:

“The fraud examiner should refrain from expressing opinions as to the guilt or innocence of any person or entity. Such conclusions are reserved for the trier of fact” (Fraud Examiners Manual, Reporting section).

Options A, B, and D relate to accounting and internal control assessments, which fall within an accounting expert’s scope. Only C is improper because it speculates about the suspect’s character or intent, which is outside the CFE’s role.

CFE admission-seeking guidance explains that once a suspect begins providing detailed information about the offense, the interviewer should transition to obtaining a verbal confession and then “probe gently” for additional details—preferably details only the subject would know. As part of confirming the general details of the offense during the verbal confession, the interviewer should obtain key baseline facts such as estimates of amounts involved, identification of other parties involved, and the location of physical evidence. Among the choices, a general estimate of the amount of money involved (A) is explicitly aligned with what the CFE guidance expects the interviewer to gather during the verbal admission stage because it helps establish scope and supports later corroboration and restitution analysis. Option B is less fitting because the emphasis is on what the suspect can reliably provide (their own actions and knowledge), not “facts known to others.” Option C attempts to build a defense narrative rather than obtain factual admission details. Option D may be useful for remediation later, but it is not a primary objective during the verbal confession stage.

The CFE Prep – Investigations states:

“If a fraud examiner gets a verbal confession from the fraudster, it does not matter whether the fraudster claims his conduct was an accident. The following items of information should be obtained … admission that the accused knew the conduct was wrong, facts known only to the confessor, the accused’s motive, approximate dates, involvement of others, physical evidence, and disposition of illicit income.”

Thus, the examiner does not need a statement about accident.

Observing signs of wealth (sports car, home remodeling) may raise suspicion, but by itself it does not provide sufficient predication to accuse or notify management of fraud. The proper next step is to conduct discreet inquiries to determine if further evidence exists before escalating.