James davis owns a small internet service provider business. recently, customers have been complaining that they are overcharged and are not receiving timely customer service. billing rates seem to increase without notice. five years ago, james used funding from several different investors in order to start his internet service. currently, he has 17 outstanding bills to be paid, all with late charges. five of the bills include notices stating that lawsuits are pending. also, he has not paid dividends to investors in two years. every day, james drives either his mercedes-benz or his new lexus to work. before starting the business, james drove only one car, a suzuki samurai. james now lives in a palatial home and owns very expensive furniture. employees constantly ask james for new equipment, but the "boss" refuses to update the old equipment. two weeks ago, james was irate and fired one of his accounting clerks for not depositing some checks on time. james is known for losing his temper. 1. discuss any fraud symptoms that are present in this case.2. why would complaints from customers be a fraud symptom?

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.