Author Question: Which of the following is true of the order of witness in an investigative process? A) The order ... (Read 223 times)

rmenurse · **on:** Jul 6, 2018

Which of the following is true of the order of witness in an investigative process?

A) The order in which witnesses are interviewed is general to specific, it begins with peripheral players, then moves to the insiders.
B) Neutral third-parties are the last witnesses to be interviewed.
C) The forensic accountant gathers maximum information by interviewing the target first.
D) The proximity of the individual to the subject of interest does not affect the order in which witnesses are to be interviewed.

Question 2

What are the two most common forms of alternate dispute resolution?

What will be an ideal response?

helenmarkerine · **Reply #1 on:** Jul 6, 2018

Answer to Question 1

A
Explanation: A) The interview order should track the proximity of the individual to the subject of interest, beginning with peripheral players, then moving to the insiders. In a criminal investigation, the order of witnesses often proceeds as follows: first, the neutral third parties, then the corroborative witness, then the suspected co-conspirators, and at last, the target.

Answer to Question 2

The most common forms of alternative dispute resolution are mediation and arbitration. Mediation is a non-binding informal process wherein a mediator evaluates the arguments of both sides and helps the parties reach common ground. If mediation fails, the parties may proceed with litigation. Arbitration, on the other hand, is a mini trial wherein each party presents its case to one or more arbitrators, who render a binding decision that generally cannot be appealed. Arbitration is often voluntary but can also be mandatory.