WHODUNIT
#7….Rejean
After questioning the customer, Debbie who was sitting nearby the computer called Susan to show the customer’s account, and verifying that the payment for the $ 5,000 was in fact recorded in the customer’s account. On this scenario the person who help to find out what was wrong with the management of the company notice that the payment for $5,000 for May 10 was entered after May 17 and May 23 and it made her confused. The computer malfunction after that checking made by her and the accounts receivable file was lost and showing a command “file not found” when they was trying to retrieve it. After 5 minutes Debbie presented to Susan a copy of bank deposit ticket dated May 10, but the deposit ticket was not stamped by the bank and did not added to the total at the bottom of the ticket. Being a suspicious, the person who is trying to find out what was really wrong on the company decided to gather all documents and conduct an investigation. But after 4 hours of living the place, Susan called her telling that nothing to worry because the program was just malfunctioning that is verified by RadioShack, the maker of their computer program. Susan also told her that she and Debbie were just planning to work all weekend reentering transaction into the computer.
Amount
Date of Payment
#5,000
May 3
#5,000
May 17
#5,000
May 23
#5,000
May 10
…..Shale and rejz
Required:
E. Would the fact that the records were maintained in a microcomputer aid in this embezzlement scheme?
Maintaining records on a microcomputer did aid the embezzlement scheme. In this case, the company did not have a proper internal control especially on its segregation of duties. Susan and Debbie are both responsible for preparing bank deposit, making the deposit and recording the receipt of cash and checks obtained from collections of accounts receivable, meaning they also have access in the computer records. Files entered to it can be change or deleted by any of them. Microcomputers does not provide
After questioning the customer, Debbie who was sitting nearby the computer called Susan to show the customer’s account, and verifying that the payment for the $ 5,000 was in fact recorded in the customer’s account. On this scenario the person who help to find out what was wrong with the management of the company notice that the payment for $5,000 for May 10 was entered after May 17 and May 23 and it made her confused. The computer malfunction after that checking made by her and the accounts receivable file was lost and showing a command “file not found” when they was trying to retrieve it. After 5 minutes Debbie presented to Susan a copy of bank deposit ticket dated May 10, but the deposit ticket was not stamped by the bank and did not added to the total at the bottom of the ticket. Being a suspicious, the person who is trying to find out what was really wrong on the company decided to gather all documents and conduct an investigation. But after 4 hours of living the place, Susan called her telling that nothing to worry because the program was just malfunctioning that is verified by RadioShack, the maker of their computer program. Susan also told her that she and Debbie were just planning to work all weekend reentering transaction into the computer.
Amount
Date of Payment
#5,000
May 3
#5,000
May 17
#5,000
May 23
#5,000
May 10
…..Shale and rejz
Required:
E. Would the fact that the records were maintained in a microcomputer aid in this embezzlement scheme?
Maintaining records on a microcomputer did aid the embezzlement scheme. In this case, the company did not have a proper internal control especially on its segregation of duties. Susan and Debbie are both responsible for preparing bank deposit, making the deposit and recording the receipt of cash and checks obtained from collections of accounts receivable, meaning they also have access in the computer records. Files entered to it can be change or deleted by any of them. Microcomputers does not provide