Proving Intent in Fraud Cases

The main difference between a breach of contract case, and fraud, is intent—the subjective mental state of mind that shows that someone actually meant to do harm or to deceive someone else.

But as with any case involving intent, this brings up difficult legal issues—specifically proving that which only exists in someone’s mind: intentions. If someone has to or wants to make out a case for fraud, and must show that someone did something with the intent to defraud, how does a party show a court or a jury, what the other side’s state of mind actually was?

Obvious Fraud

There are times when an action is so obviously deceptive, that intent can just be assumed.

Someone who, for example, is convincing elderly people to sign over the deed to their homes by telling them blatant lies and stripping those properties of equity, can be assumed to be acting with ill, bad or fraudulent intent—you don’t need to do a deep dive into someone’s psyche to figure that out.

External Evidence

But other times, intent isn’t so blatant or obvious. In these cases, courts will look to intrinsic evidence, to find intent.

People engaging in schemes to deceive or defraud, don’t just do it in their heads. There is often a trail of emails, texts, or conversations, or even actions, evidencing what that person’s intent actually was.

That means that diligent discovery often must be done, parsing out these documents. Cell phone experts may be called on to image someone’s cell phone, to pull text messages out of it. Likewise for servers that may have emails that need preservation.

Prior Knowledge

What knowledge did someone objectively have? If someone knows that something is illegal, or even impossible, but “sells” that idea to the public anyway, they are acting opposite to what they know to be legitimate, legal or true—and thus, that contradiction can only be explained by an intent to deceive.

Many businesses get repeated complaints from customers, or even from government agencies, about their products or services, and they continue to sell or provide them, knowing that people are upset and that they may not be delivering what they are promising. This continued, knowing deception, may warrant a finding of fraudulent activity.

Actions or Inactions

What did the person who is accused of fraud, actually do or say? Often action or lack thereof, can show intent to defraud.

If I ask you for money in return for procuring goods for you from overseas, and you pay me, and it turns out I made absolutely no effort to procure those goods, there is a good chance I purposely defrauded you—I made no effort, not even a cursory one, to try to do what I was supposed to do under the agreement.

Need representation for a case involving fraud? Call our Fort Lauderdale business and fraud litigation lawyers at Sweeney Law P.A. at 954-440-3993 for help.

Sources:

law.cornell.edu/wex/intent

lawinfo.com/videos/litigation-and-appeals/how-can-a-prosecution-prove-intent.html