I've also been complimented on the diverse range of disciplines I look into in order to better understand my subject - and to be able to communicate it. Such as psychology.

#psychology creates near schizophrenia in me: on the one hand it's absolutely central to understanding a huge part of the behaviour of the myriad individuals that commit financial crime. It's also extremely important when designing policies and procedures especially for getting "buy-in."

But when it comes to failure, to trying to correct shortcomings, it's next to useless.

It's one of the core aspects of Understanding Suspicion in Financial Crime - why don't people recognise suspicious activities and why don't they report it when they do?

All too often #regulators bring action against a #bank for failing to make reports but no one asks, in most cases, how that #failure arose.

#Prosecutors stand before #courts stuck because there is almost no #judicial #authority as to what suspicion is in this context. But there are indicators and these can be explained to #judges and #juries. If prosecutors know what they are looking for.

Be it #fraud, #corruption, #embezzlement, #trafficking or other financial crime, everything comes down to #suspicion: was an #SAR filed? If not why not? Who is to #blame?

And why is it so difficult to change mindsets? And where does philosophy come in?

Courses for regulators, prosecutors and financial sector risk, compliance and investigation officers are available face to face and a more general course online.