Fraud Archives - Earmark CPE

Could your most trusted employee be secretly siphoning company funds?

In a recent episode of the Oh My Fraud podcast, fraud investigator Kelly Paxton shares how seemingly reliable staff—often overlooked for potential misconduct—can exploit organizational blind spots.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, nearly 90% of bookkeepers in the United States are women. While many people assume women are less likely to commit fraud, Paxton warns that it’s not gender but position and access that matter most. By trusting certain employees implicitly and failing to establish strong controls, businesses inadvertently cause serious financial losses.

As Paxton’s cases illustrate, ignoring stereotypes and adopting “trust but verify” strategies are crucial steps toward preventing fraud.

Kelly Paxton’s Path to Fraud Investigation

Kelly Paxton did not start out in law enforcement. She began her career in financial services as a commodities and bond trader. One day, a U.S. Customs agent called her brokerage firm asking about a suspicious client. Kelly alerted the agents, which led to a deeper conversation—and ultimately, a job offer. She joined U.S. Customs and conducted investigations into money laundering, narcotics, and other major crimes before moving into background checks for federal agencies.

Her investigative focus shifted when she joined a local sheriff’s office and noticed that nearly all the embezzlement suspects she encountered were women. Wanting to understand why, she discovered criminologist Kathleen Daly’s 1989 work referencing “pink collar crime,” a term describing embezzlement often perpetrated by those in bookkeeping or finance positions. Paxton’s takeaway: Access plus trust is the real key—90% of bookkeepers may be women, but it’s the opportunity that matters most.

Understanding Pink Collar Crime

Pink collar crime typically involves smaller amounts stolen over extended periods—fraudsters who make subtle “lifestyle” upgrades rather than lavish purchases. This can happen when the organization deeply trusts an employee. In many cases, they’re seen as family, invited into the home, and never suspected of wrongdoing. Victims are often embarrassed when they discover the truth and hesitate to report it—what Paxton calls “no victim shaming”: the more we shame victims, the less they come forward.

Key characteristics include:

Position-based access: Bookkeepers and finance staff control incoming or outgoing funds.
Incremental theft: A pattern of small transactions that grow larger over time.
Rationalization: Fraudsters may plan to “pay it back” but rarely do.
Deep trust: Employers assume loyal staff, especially women, “would never steal.”

When Pink Collar Crime Turns Deadly: “Red Collar” Cases

Most pink-collar crimes involve embezzlement without violence. However, some cases escalate to “red collar crime,” where financial fraud intersects with homicide. As Paxton explains, desperate fraudsters may resort to extreme measures when they fear exposure.

The Lori Isenberg Case

One chilling example is Lori Isenberg, a nonprofit executive director in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. Her organization provided housing for low-income individuals—hardly the type of place where you’d suspect significant embezzlement. Yet over three years, Lori allegedly stole between $500,000 and $2.5 million by creating fake accounts, forging checks, and misusing her daughters’ and husband’s names.

When investigations closed in on her scheme, Lori took drastic action. In February 2018, on the same day local news broke a story about her suspected fraud, she took her husband out on a boat trip in the freezing Idaho winter. He mysteriously fell overboard and drowned. An autopsy revealed a lethal dose of Benadryl in his system. Lori claimed it was a suicide attempt gone wrong—an explanation contradicted by digital evidence showing she researched how to drug someone with Benadryl.

After disappearing for four months, Lori was eventually caught and accepted an Alford plea, which essentially concedes that a jury would likely find her guilty without formally admitting guilt. She received 30 years for second-degree murder, with an additional 5 years for her financial crimes, making it highly unlikely she will ever be released. The Lori Isenberg case underscores how far a fraudster might go to avoid being exposed—a stark reminder that misplaced trust and weak internal controls can have devastating consequences.

The Role of Trust, Bias, and Access

Society is conditioned to trust women—parents instruct children to seek a “nice lady” for help if they’re lost, for instance. This assumption carries over into workplaces, where female employees handling finances often face less scrutiny.

Paxton recalls her own days in U.S. Customs: “You put two women in a Honda Accord, and no one thinks anything is unusual. You put two men in a Ford Focus, and they’re pegged as cops.” Similarly, a “helpful bookkeeper” can escape suspicion for years.

What About Sentencing?

Sentencing for embezzlement and related fraud varies widely:

Federal Cases: They follow sentencing guidelines based on dollar amounts and other factors.
Local Cases: Judges can have broad discretion. Some jurisdictions impose tough sentences, while others might view fraud as a “civil matter,” limiting law enforcement intervention unless there are other serious elements (e.g., homicide).

This inconsistent approach can embolden perpetrators who believe they can dodge severe penalties—until a high-profile case, a dogged investigator, or a high-stakes victim (like a large corporation) brings full prosecution.

Avoiding Blind Spots: Trust but Verify

Rather than assuming anyone is “too nice” or “not smart enough” to steal, Kelly Paxton encourages businesses and nonprofits to focus on position-based controls:

Segregate Duties: Ensure no single person handles every financial task.
Surprise Audits: Don’t just check large transactions; occasionally review smaller ones.
Vendor Verification: Confirm that vendors and accounts are legitimate, especially if newly created.
Encourage Transparency: Cultivate a culture where employees and clients can report suspicious activity without fear.
No Victim Shaming: Publicizing embezzlement—when safe to do so—helps others learn and prevents repeat offenders from quietly moving on to the next company.

Learn More from Kelly Paxton

Kelly Paxton now hosts the Fraudish Podcast (formerly Great Women in Fraud), interviewing fraud investigators, victims, and even fraudsters themselves. She also covers topics like red-collar crime, employee embezzlement, and how biases impact investigations. Her new book, Embezzlement: How to Detect, Prevent, and Investigate Pink Collar Crime, is available on Amazon.

For a deeper look at Lori Isenberg’s story—and other fraud sagas—listen to the full episode of Oh My Fraud. You can also earn CPE credit by downloading the Earmark app and completing a short quiz related to the episode.

In the cat-and-mouse game of occupational fraud, organizations often focus on implementing the latest anti-fraud controls. But the 2024 report from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners reveals a surprising truth: the most effective defense against fraud may be hiding in plain sight – your company’s culture.

In Episode 58 of the Oh My Fraud podcast, hosts Greg Kyte and Caleb Newquist dive deep into the report’s findings. With their signature blend of humor and expertise, Greg and Caleb explore the key trends, surprising revelations, and actionable strategies organizations can leverage to fortify their defenses against occupational fraud.

Implementing Internal Controls Is Not Always Possible

While implementing technical anti-fraud controls is crucial, the report emphasizes that fostering a culture of integrity, led by management’s commitment to ethical behavior, is the cornerstone of effective fraud prevention in organizations of all sizes. This is especially important in small organizations.

Greg Kyte points out, “We have very minimal separation of duties at our company because we have four employees, and we’ve got one owner who fulfills an oversight role.”

In smaller businesses with limited staff, implementing a comprehensive system of internal controls can be daunting. The fundamental principle of separation of duties, which involves distributing key responsibilities among multiple individuals to prevent any single person from having excessive control over a process, becomes increasingly difficult to achieve when there are only a handful of employees.

Tips: The Most Common Fraud Detection Method

The ACFE report reveals a striking finding: tips are the most common method of detecting occupational fraud, accounting for 43% of all cases. This is nearly three times the rate of the next most effective methods, internal audits (14%) and management reviews (13%). Surprisingly, external audits and accidental discovery detected only 3% and 5% of frauds, respectively, highlighting employees’ critical role in uncovering wrongdoing.

These statistics underscore the importance of fostering a culture where employees feel empowered and motivated to speak up when they suspect unethical behavior. Organizations can encourage their staff to serve as the first line of defense against fraud by creating a work environment that values transparency, accountability, and open communication.

To maximize the impact of employee tips, organizations should consider implementing a comprehensive whistleblower program that includes:

Clear reporting channels: Provide multiple avenues for employees to report suspected fraud, such as a dedicated hotline, email address, or web-based form.
Anonymity and confidentiality: Ensure that employees can report their concerns without fear of retaliation by allowing anonymous reporting and protecting the confidentiality of whistleblowers.
Training and awareness: Educate employees on the signs of fraud, the importance of reporting suspicious activity, and the procedures for submitting a tip.
Timely investigation and response: Establish a protocol for promptly investigating tips and taking appropriate action when fraud is substantiated.

Profiling The Fraudsters: Challenging Stereotypes

One of the report’s most striking findings is the distribution of fraudsters across different organizational functions. While operations, accounting, and sales employees collectively committed the highest number of frauds, the report reveals that executive-level fraudsters caused the greatest financial damage, with a staggering median loss of nearly $800,000 per incident.

This disparity highlights the unique challenges of high-level fraud, as executives often have greater access to company resources, less oversight, and more sophisticated methods of concealing their activities. Organizations must remain vigilant against fraud at all levels, but the report’s findings underscore the critical importance of effective controls and oversight mechanisms for senior management.

Another surprising revelation is that the vast majority of perpetrators (86%) are first-time offenders with no prior history of fraud convictions. This finding challenges the assumption that fraudsters are career criminals who repeatedly engage in wrongdoing. In reality, many occupational fraudsters are trusted employees who succumb to financial pressures, opportunity, or rationalization – the three elements of the classic “fraud triangle.”

This insight has significant implications for organizations seeking to prevent fraud. Rather than focusing solely on background checks and criminal history, companies must adopt a more holistic approach that addresses the underlying factors that can lead employees to commit fraud.

Recognizing Red Flags: The Human Element of Fraud Detection

The report identifies several key red flags that are most commonly associated with occupational fraud, including:

Living beyond means: Employees who suddenly exhibit a lavish lifestyle that seems inconsistent with their salary may use ill-gotten gains to fund their spending.
Financial difficulties: Individuals facing financial pressures, such as excessive debt or gambling losses, may be more likely to rationalize fraudulent behavior.
Close vendor/customer ties: Unusually close relationships with third parties can indicate conflicts of interest or collusion.
Unwillingness to share duties: Employees resistant to sharing tasks or taking time off may be trying to conceal fraudulent activities.
Irritability, suspiciousness, or defensiveness: Individuals who become unusually irritable or defensive when questioned about their work may be trying to deflect attention from their wrongdoing.

Greg humorously notes, “If I still had a Tinder profile and I tried to describe myself in three words, it would be irritable, suspicious, and defensive.” While Greg’s quip is meant to be lighthearted, it underscores the real challenge of distinguishing between normal human behavior and potential fraud indicators.

Indeed, the report reveals that a surprising 16% of fraudsters exhibit no behavioral red flags, highlighting the limitations of relying solely on observing employee behavior to detect wrongdoing. This finding underscores the importance of implementing a multi-faceted fraud prevention approach that combines human intuition and technical controls.

Fortifying Your Fraud Defenses

The 2024 ACFE Report to the Nations highlights the critical interplay between technical anti-fraud controls and organizational culture in preventing occupational fraud. While proactive measures like tips, internal audits, and data monitoring are effective detection methods, fostering a culture of integrity is the foundation of a comprehensive fraud prevention strategy.

To gain deeper insights into the latest fraud trends, detection methods, and prevention strategies, listen to the Oh My Fraud podcast episode and discover how to strengthen your organization’s resilience against this pervasive threat. By understanding the human element behind fraud and implementing a multi-faceted approach to prevention, you can safeguard your organization’s assets and reputation in the face of an ever-evolving fraud landscape.

When Trust Turns Toxic: Inside the World of Pink Collar Crime