Name

Tutor

Course

Date

Auditing Case Study

What activities did each of these employees do to implement the fraud and to keep it going?

Crupi's was accused of misuse of a corporate MasterCard was one of the methods by

which Madoff monetarily compensated her investment in the securities extortion. O'Hara, Perez

were was accused for doctoring the records that had been quickly printed for outside examiner

KPMG by placing them in the cooler and afterward tossing them around to make them look more

seasoned(Robert 108). In addition, Bongiorno was accused of validating fake trades in customer

accounts months, and sometimes years, after they occurred. Finally, Bonventre is accused of

manipulating financial records to hide the fraud.

What was the prison sentence each received?

Daniel Bonaventure was found guilty and was sentenced to 10 years in prison. On the

other hand, Crupi was also found guilty and sentenced to six years in prison.in addition

Bongiorno also got a prison term of six years in prison. Finally Ohara and Perez each was

sentenced to two and half year in prison.

Do you think the sentence fit the gravity of the crime in each case? Based on the gravity or

seriousness of the crime, including the harm caused by this fraud I hold the opinion that despite

the recommendation of a more severe sentence, the six got a fair sentence.
 A. Summarize AU324

This auditing standard requires the professionals in this field to play out his or her work

with due care and due tirelessness. The expert constancy forces the duty on every one of the

people that make the association out of a professional auditor, to hold fast to the standards

identified with the execution of the work and to the report. The activity of due care requires a

basic survey at each level of supervision of the work performed and the criteria utilized by

the individuals who took an interest in the examination. The fact that the auditor is competent

and has mental independence does not guarantee that his examination is a success because it

is necessary that he does not act with negligence.

B. Argue that the AU 324 audit standard applies and thus the feeder fund auditors have a

special responsibility under auditing standards.

Professional capacity and care is a standard common to the profession of public

accountant and to all the professions that emerge from the professional nature of the audit

activity. While it is true that a professional cannot be considered infallible one must evaluate the

ability to perform professional activities or their negligence (Bryan 21).

In fact, professional activity, as a human, is fallible and it must be considered that the

common people do not have defined the concept of audit scope which is done based on samples,

selective evidence and, above all, The opinion when it refers to the reasonable presentation of the

financial situation. Financial reasonableness depends on judgment and judgment is susceptible to

error. Therefore, audit standard will not apply and thus the feeder fund auditors will not have a

special responsibility under the auditing standards.

C. Argue the opposite: that the AU 324 audit standard does not apply and thus the feeder

fund auditors do not have a special responsibility under the auditing standards

When the auditor has encountered a series of limitations in the progress of its review and

consequently, the financial statements do not present the financial situation and results of

operations in accordance with accounting principles, it must issue an abstention opinion and to

explain clearly the motives and implicit consequences of it(Lindquist 280). Therefore, audit

standard will apply and thus the feeder fund auditors have a special responsibility under the

auditing standards.
 Works Cited

Bryan, David B. "Influence of Organized Labor on Audit Quality and Internal Control." (2017).

Lindquist, Tim M. "Traditional versus contemporary goals and methods in accounting education:

Bridging the gap with cooperative learning." Journal of Education for Business 70.5

(1995): 278-284.

Robert J. Morad. "A Review of Recent Investor Issues in the Madoff, Standford and Forte Ponzi

Scheme Cases." J. Bus. & Sec. L. 10 (2009): 113.