The correct answer is A. In common law systems, authentication is the process of showing that an item of evidence is what the proponent claims it is. Federal Rule of Evidence 901 states that to satisfy the authentication requirement, the party offering the evidence must produce enough proof to support a finding that the item is what that party claims. This is the core purpose of authentication.

Option B is incorrect because records, including many digital records, can often be authenticated through testimony or certification from a person with knowledge, such as a custodian of records, depending on the applicable rule and context. Option C is wrong because authentication is not something that must be “reviewed and voted on” by a jury as a prerequisite; it is an evidentiary foundation issue generally handled by the court. Option D is also incorrect because even properly authenticated evidence must still be relevant to be admissible. Authentication and relevance are separate requirements, and satisfying one does not eliminate the need for the other. For CFE purposes, the essential idea is that authentication establishes genuineness and identity, so A is the correct answer.

The correct answer is C because it is the best example of circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence does not directly prove the ultimate fact in dispute. Instead, it establishes surrounding facts from which a judge or jury may reasonably infer the conclusion. Here, proof that the cashier deposited $900 into a personal bank account the day after $900 was stolen does not directly show the cashier taking the money, but it strongly suggests involvement in the theft. That is precisely how circumstantial evidence works in fraud and theft cases.

Option A is direct evidence, not circumstantial evidence, because an eyewitness claims to have actually seen the cashier remove money from the register. Option B is merely demonstrative or illustrative evidence showing store layout; by itself, it does not tend to prove that the cashier committed the theft. Option D also does not prove the act of theft; it only explains a workplace rule or standard. In fraud examinations, circumstantial evidence is often very important because many fraudulent acts occur in secret, requiring investigators to prove wrongdoing through patterns, financial links, timing, and conduct rather than direct observation alone. Therefore, C is the strongest circumstantial-evidence choice.

This question tests your knowledge of Domain 5.

In the context of Money Laundering, specifically relating to FATF, the question asks about COD, FATF.

The correct answer is A: True.

This question addresses money laundering concepts. The correct answer correctly identifies the stage, method, or regulatory framework related to money laundering or anti-money laundering efforts. Understanding these processes is critical for fraud examiners working to detect and prevent financial crimes.