Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ACFE CFE-Law Exam - Topic 4 Question 48 Discussion

Grant, a fraud examiner is investigating Beatrice for embezzlement on his employer's behalf. During his investigation. Grant learns that Beatrice has cheated on her spouse and he tells several of Beatrice's coworkers about it Beatrice discovers that Grant revealed the unflattering (albeit true) information about her and decides to file a claim of defamation against Grant. Which of the following is the BEST of why Beatrice will not win her defamation case?
A) The information was true
B) The communications to the subject's coworkers were privileged
C) The news was not communicated to enough people
D) The statement was not printed and distributed

ACFE CFE-Law Exam - Topic 4 Question 48 Discussion

Actual exam question for ACFE's CFE-Law exam
Question #: 48
Topic #: 4
[All CFE-Law Questions]

Grant, a fraud examiner is investigating Beatrice for embezzlement on his employer's behalf. During his investigation. Grant learns that Beatrice has cheated on her spouse and he tells several of Beatrice's coworkers about it Beatrice discovers that Grant revealed the unflattering (albeit true) information about her and decides to file a claim of defamation against Grant. Which of the following is the BEST of why Beatrice will not win her defamation case?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Nickolas at Sep 15, 2024, 09:19 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CFE-Law Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Malcolm
9 months ago
Yeah, she won't win this one for sure!
upvoted 0 times
...
Dierdre
9 months ago
I thought privileged communication mattered here too?
upvoted 0 times
...
Truman
10 months ago
Wait, can she really sue for that? Seems odd.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laquanda
10 months ago
Totally agree, truth is a solid defense!
upvoted 0 times
...
Micaela
10 months ago
The info was true, so no defamation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Desirae
10 months ago
I don't recall much about the specifics of printed statements, so option D seems less likely, but I guess it could be a factor in some cases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carolann
11 months ago
I feel like we had a practice question about defamation that mentioned the number of people the statement was shared with, so option C could be relevant, but I'm not confident.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aileen
11 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think there might be something about privileged communication that could apply here, which makes option B a possibility too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sheridan
11 months ago
I remember discussing how truth is a solid defense in defamation cases, so I think option A makes the most sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tresa
11 months ago
I think the key here is that the information was shared with coworkers, not the general public. That suggests B about privilege is the best answer, since the communications were likely within the scope of the fraud investigation. The truth defense is good, but privilege seems stronger in this case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shanda
11 months ago
Okay, let me think this through. If the information was true, that's usually a strong defense. But the fact that it was shared with coworkers makes me wonder if B about privilege is the way to go. I'll have to weigh the pros and cons of each option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glory
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a little unsure about this one. I know truth is a defense, but I'm not sure if the fact that it was shared with coworkers changes things. Maybe B about privilege is the better answer?
upvoted 0 times
...
Dona
11 months ago
This seems like a straightforward defamation question. I'm pretty confident the answer is A - the information was true, which is a valid defense against defamation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lawana
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm not totally sure. I guess identifying the data sources available could be a good first step to understand what information we have to work with.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gary
2 years ago
But what about the privilege communication to coworkers? Could that also be a strong reason why Beatrice may not win?
upvoted 0 times
...
Kris
2 years ago
I agree with Salena, if the information was true, Beatrice may not win her defamation case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Clare
2 years ago
I bet Beatrice is regretting that affair now. Maybe she should have thought about the consequences before stepping out on her spouse.
upvoted 0 times
...
Salena
2 years ago
I think the best reason is that the information was true.
upvoted 0 times
...
Corinne
2 years ago
The best answer is definitely A. If the information is true, it's not defamation, no matter how juicy the details are.
upvoted 0 times
Kiera
2 years ago
D) The statement was not printed and distributed
upvoted 0 times
...
Lizbeth
2 years ago
B) The communications to the subject's coworkers were privileged
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerry
2 years ago
A) The information was true
upvoted 0 times
...
William
2 years ago
A) The information was true
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Junita
2 years ago
Wow, Beatrice is really reaching here! Defamation for telling the truth? That's a stretch even for a fraud examiner like Grant.
upvoted 0 times
Rupert
2 years ago
B) The communications to the subject's coworkers were privileged
upvoted 0 times
...
Cordelia
2 years ago
A) The information was true
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel