Sarah Carson on Fraud Detection Through Observation, Strategy, and Human Behavior Analysis
Sarah Carson, Private Investigator and Certified Fraud Examiner, takes the detection of fraud to be a task of systematic observation rather than the search for a single telling clue. In her investigation work, she has had to look beyond appearances and analyze everything that is going on around. This is significant since fraud tends not to declare itself in one single moment but in small, inconsequential actions.
Fraud Rarely Looks Like a Single “Tell”
Popular culture makes the detection of fraud seem relatively easy. If someone averts their eyes, fidgets in their seat, touches their face, or suddenly gets nervous, then the investigator supposedly has their answer.
The reality is a bit messier. According to research collected by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, it is unwise to use isolated nonverbal cues as dependable signs of deception. Gaze aversion, head movement, grooming cues, and similar behaviors do not magically become signs of lying just because they happen during a hard conversation. Context and surrounding evidence matter.
This is why Sarah Carson’s approach is especially relevant. Observation is important, but observation needs to be structured. A behavior change deserves investigation, but it does not necessarily earn an answer.
The better question is what changes, when it changes, and what else changes with it.
Sarah Carson’s Three-Layer View of an Investigation
One way to look at fraud investigation is to distinguish between observation, reporting, and verification.
Observation is the first step. Observers see unusual patterns, inconsistencies, timing, relationships, and behavioral changes.
Reporting is the second step. What does each person claim happened? What explanation does each person or document offer, and what do they fail to explain?
Verification is the third step. Can the story be verified by looking at financial information, digital information, and public information?
For Sarah Carson, a professional fraud examiner, investigating is a task that always involves financial analysis and investigative techniques. In her written work for Fraud Magazine, she explained the importance of bringing together the skills of a private investigator and a Certified Fraud Examiner, conducting comprehensive and legal investigations and reporting.
This is important because no matter how compelling the story may be, it remains a story without the underlying facts.
Follow the Pattern, Not the Drama
Fraud detection is enhanced when the investigation focuses on patterns.
The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ 2024 Report to the Nations showed that 84% of occupational fraud offenders demonstrated at least one behavioral indicator, examples of which included living above their means and money problems. The report is not saying that such behaviors equate to occupational fraud. They might simply act as red flags in the process of detecting occupational fraud.
Money trouble does not make a person commit occupational fraud. A drastic change in their lifestyle does not automatically constitute wrongdoing. Defensiveness does not prove guilt. However, a combination of independently observed facts that have the same implication calls for closer inspection.
Open Sources Can Change the Shape of a Case
Public information sources can help an investigator establish timelines, identify relationships between people, compare statements, and provide context before investigators decide where to look next. Open-source investigation becomes particularly valuable when it comes to verifying a statement against some kind of information that has nothing to do with the interview.
Yet again, this is the principle: information-gathering should never be equated with proving anything.
The reliability of the source, the date when this or that piece of information became known, proper identification of the involved parties, and its support for the proposition in question… all these are the elements which must be taken into account.
Sarah Carson’s experience in investigations as well as in business intelligence shows that an investigation which goes beyond interviews makes sense. The investigation takes many angles: people, records, behavior, timing, and independent sources.
Sarah Carson’s Standard: Evidence Before Certainty
Perhaps the most effective method of fraud detection is one of the least showy approaches possible: remain in doubt for long enough to be able to perform a thorough investigation.
According to Sarah Carson, the investigation itself must be thorough, legal, and unbiased. Such requirements allow any evidence to modify the initial hypothesis.
Moreover, this approach allows investigators to protect themselves from the most dangerous factor in behavioral analysis, which is confirmation bias.
After an investigator starts believing that someone is being deceitful, even normal actions will seem suspicious.
Good investigative strategy works in the reverse order. It tries to prove all assumptions.
Sarah Carson’s View of the Investigator’s Advantage
Human behavior will always play a part in any fraud investigation since, at the end of the day, fraud is a human endeavor that requires decision-making, interaction, motivation, and information hiding. However, human behavior matters because it helps explain the evidence.
This is the overall principle that Sarah Carson follows. Observation flags the issue, strategy guides the next move, interviews uncover information, open-source research adds context, and evidence establishes the facts.
Connect with Sarah Carson on LinkedIn to discuss investigative observation, fraud examination, and the role of human behavior in finding what the surface story leaves out.
