Fraud Investigator & Sherlock Holmes

I can’t tell you how much everyone wants to be an investigator. and you will hardly find someone refusing to be in an investigating role. And the cherry on top is to be a fraud investigator. No one refuses to be a fraud Investigator.

The world of crime has two parts a criminal doing the crime and an investigator deducing how the crime was done and devising plans for its prevention. From real-life detectives to fictional characters, every one of us has a feeling at the bottom of his heart that makes him believe that he is a born detective.

So who is a fraud investigator and what does he do? From what we have seen in movies and read in novels here is what an investigator does:

An investigator investigates how the fraud was conducted. He, first dissects the reported or given information, scrutinizes everything, and then works on building the case based on the truth as rationally as he could and then replicate the process with which the incident happened to validate his perspective.

“The harder the game is to solve, the more fun you can have, right?”- Kogoro Akechi, ‘Ranpo Kitan’.

He then replicates the fraud/ crimes and justifies that some mischievous mind acted in a certain way to do an illegal act. At this time, the investigator feels accomplished. He now knows the process and understands how the fraud/ crime was done.

With this awareness, he then moves on to suggest improvements in the process. That’s all. All the investigator needs to do is understand, confirm and recommend future checks.

But on a personal level, somehow the investigator happens to make a personal attachment/ concern with the case. He continues to dig deep and try to find the root of the problem. But as he is clueless and only trying to relive what the fraudster has done, he will always be one step behind.

“Crime will always come first because Crime is common and Logic is rare”.

All of this, maybe (completely or partially) the working dynamics of a fraud investigator. The job description is appealing. And for most of us, this job makes us feel similar to the super detective from our childhood. Mr. Sherlock Holmes.

Mr. Sherlock was not real but his fictional character was presented to us by the British author and physician Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Sherlock had the ability to use basic rules logic and observation to solve cases (just like any investigator should do).

Out of the people from Holmes's family, he was the most discussed and known character. Sherlock had a brother (Mycroft) a much more powerful and influential person. He was described as a character who has abilities of deduction exceeding knowledge of Sherlock. The only difference between Mycroft and Sherlock was that Mycroft hated the fieldwork whereas Sherlock lived in the fieldwork.

If you had not watched Enola Holmes movies, would you remember her as Sherlock’s little sister? The character of Enola Holmes was not created by Mr. Conan Doyle. She is usually referred to as a Non-canonical. She is one hell of a personality owner herself.

Enola was a rebellious independent girl. She was the finder of lost things. Using her natural ability to get things done, she used to create disguises on her quests to be reunited with her mother by evading her brothers.

Sherlock had a formidable enemy, Professor James Moriarty. Moriarty was the criminal mastermind and the opposite of Sherlock Holmes. Moriarty uses his intelligence and resources to help criminals by promoting crime and giving criminal strategies. He also provided protection to these criminals from the law, in exchange for a fee or some cut.

Sherlock was in a state where he thinks that Moriarty was at the root of every crime. He used to call Moriarty a “Napolean of Crime”.

The phrase “Napoleon of crime” was picked by Mr. Doyle from a Scotland Yard inspector referring to Adam Worth who was a real-life criminal mastermind and upon whom the character of Moriarty was based.

Allow me to boggle your mind here with a question. In your opinion, was Professor James Moriarty a reflection of Sherlock Holmes's imagination? Or did he actually manage to fool Sherlock Holmes every time?

“I’m not a psychopath, Anderson. I’m a high-functioning sociopath. Do your research.” ‒ Sherlock Holmes

Was Moriarty a figment of Sherlock’s imagination? Was Moriarty in control of Sherlock? Why did Sherlock fail to understand so much about the worldly ways used by Moriarty when he could easily deduce a crime (or maybe practically relive it)?

Knowing what's done and how it's done will change your perspective of life forever. The only difference between a fraudster and an investigator is the fine line of morality. If an investigator forges the idea of morality, he would be more lethal than any of the fraudsters.

I am looking forward to reading your replies and comments about this piece. It would definitely help me. Take care until next time.