He differed from the average fraud perpetrator in that he admitted what he had done and promised to pay back the money he had stolen. The more he did it, the more it became an addiction. These characteristics made it difficult to detect him because everyone he worked for and with trusted and liked him. Although they didn’t like him for what he had but
On the other hand, there were many differences between Tom and Bernie. One important different is that Tom was a usurer; he gave people money for his own profit. He landed people money in a high interest, so high that they couldn’t pay back the money. But, Bernie did the opposite of Tom; he collected money from the people, and made them believe that they would be paid back in a high interest. He couldn’t pay back the money to the people because he spent the money for
3.1.Evaluate own knowledge, performance and understanding against relevant standards. Once I have analysed the demands and expectations of my job role, the next step is to consider what I can already do and which areas I may further need to develop. This learning outcome looks at how I might evaluate my own performance and how I might use feedback to inform me. It is important to think abut what I can do already and which areas I need to develop further. To do this I can ask for feedback from advisers or assessors.
“Compulsive gamblers can’t control the impulse to gamble, even when they know their gambling is hurting themselves or their loved ones. Gambling is all they can think about and all they want to do, no matter the consequences.” (Gambling.) An addicted gambler can’t stop gambling whether they’re winning or losing, broke or rich, happy or depressed. Even when they know the odds are against them and they can’t afford to lose, people with a gambling addiction can’t “stay off the bet.” (Gambling.) Problems caused by gambling are not just financially, however.
He wanted the interviewer to explain the meaning of that particular term, especially to the audience, who might have no idea about this research that has been done, which called “parliam statements” Q4- It comes from PT Parliam the circus preparsure who said we have something for everybody. *What kind of information did the interviewer want to extract? He wanted to emphasize the information, that he knew from his previous study about his interview, from the interviewee who knows more about this topic. *What is the purpose of the question? It is also to give the audience the knowledge of this derivation and to give the impression to the interviewee that he has a very good background about this topic as
I had to make that the words that I was saying now was going to be positive. If I stay in the zone of being positive then, should would be a want all the time. Enact commitments. In our book we learn how to get to the level you want be. You have to understand just do it.
When asked why he took the case, Schlichtmann responded, “pride, greed, ambition. Getting rich by doing good (491).”Greed was his motivating factor but Schlichtmann quickly learned that being rich isn’t so difficult, being famous isn’t so difficult, being rich and famous together aren’t so difficult, but being rich, famous and doing good together was very difficult. 2.2 million dollars later and his residence as homeless, Schlichtmann surely let greed blind him. It is hard to say whether Schlichtmann persevered with the case because of a change of heart, or because the mere fact that he had invested almost a decade of his life to it. However I do feel competent in saying that after receiving the verdict against Beatrice and despite being broke, Schlichtmann persevered because he cared about this case.
Some of the current sources of stress for the criminal justice professional are, long hours and not enough family time with loved ones. I do believe that the agencies provide adequate assistance with managing occupational stressors; they are just not explored and used enough by the individuals that need them. I believe the politics of corruption exists within the field of criminal justice. I say that because it seems that if you are wealthy strings can be pulled for you and u can afford the best lawyers, and u could be guilty but you will get off because you or your family are well off. On the other hand there that middle class of poor that knows nothing about the system or doesn’t have the resources to get a good lawyer they are screwed completely ruin your life and affecting some people around you.
The blogs he wrote made people lose a lot of money. He may not know what means to manipulate the stock market since he was too young. the S.E.C suited him for stock graud('33-7891") because the S.E.C stood in the side of law, which means there was no exceptions no matter age, sex or race. Also, his father supported him while he was breaking the law. He lied, made people lost money and even made chaos in stock market.
Body Paragraphs Jose Alvarado Argosy University Abstract The first and most common problem that an irresponsible winner faces after winning is reckless spending. Reckless spending is when an irresponsible individual starts a spending spree just because they have the money to do so. This sort of spending is dangerous because the individual is under the delusion that they can afford anything in the world. This sort of spending can put the individual into inevitable money problems and into debt. People cannot be millionaires overnight and know how to act when they receive large sums of money.