Forensic Accounting and the Doctrine of Criminal Intent in Financial Fraud: A Legal and Audit-Based Examination of Mexico’s Oceanografía–Banamex Case

Abstract

Financial fraud in receivables financing presents challenges for identifying documentary manipulation, tracing financial responsibility, and assessing evidence of criminal intent. This study develops an integrated forensic accounting and legal assessment framework to examine Mexico’s Oceanografía–Banamex case, focusing on the relationship between financial irregularities, authorization practices, and evidence relevant to deliberate deception. The framework combines transaction reconstruction, invoice verification, documentary triangulation, transaction network analysis, and an evidence matrix to distinguish indicators of intentional misconduct from negligence and weaknesses in internal controls. The study dataset comprises 12,000 receivables financing records, 2,400 invoice documents, 180 authorization logs, and 60 correspondence files covering a three year observation period. Data preparation involves record standardization, duplicate identification, chronological alignment, and reconciliation of invoices with financing and approval information. Twenty four forensic indicators assess unsupported receivables, repeated invoices, inconsistent approval dates, unusual financing concentrations, documentary discrepancies, and authorization exceptions. Rule based screening and network analysis identify potentially irregular transactions, which are subsequently assessed against reference labels through independent documentary review. Legal analysis organizes the resulting evidence according to its relevance to knowledge, deception, participation, and financial benefit, while considering alternative explanations. The integrated framework identifies 912 of 960 labelled irregular records, achieving 95.0% recall. Among 1,000 flagged records, 912 correspond to reference irregularities, yielding 91.2% precision and a 93.1% F1 score. Conventional checklist screening identifies 720 irregular records, producing 75.0% recall. The proposed approach therefore improves recall by 20 percentage points, demonstrating stronger identification of irregular financing patterns within the analyzed dataset. Documentary inconsistencies and recurring authorization exceptions provide priorities for further investigation, although these indicators alone cannot establish criminal intent or individual guilt. The study contributes an auditable framework connecting financial analysis with legally relevant evidentiary assessment. Its findings support integrated verification, transaction tracing, and contextual review as complementary tools for investigating complex financial fraud. The framework emphasizes evidence provenance, document authentication, corroboration, and distinctions between suspicious transactions and established responsibility. Its practical value lies in strengthening investigative prioritization and audit transparency while supporting carefully qualified legal interpretation of financial evidence within the examined case context.