Final answer:
Organizations and fraud victims should pursue either civil or criminal action, or both, depending on the specific circumstances. Criminal actions can lead to the prosecution and punishment of the perpetrator, while civil actions allow for the recovery of damages. The choice of action depends on the desired outcomes and the nature of the fraud.
Step-by-step explanation:
To prevent fraud from reoccurring, most organizations and other fraud victims should d. Pursue either civil or criminal action, depending on the circumstances, or both. This is because courts hear two different types of disputes: criminal and civil. Criminal law involves the government establishing rules and punishments for conduct that harms society, while civil law involves disputes between private parties over harm or injury. Victims of fraud could pursue criminal remedies to have the perpetrator prosecuted and potentially incarcerated, which serves as a public deterrent. Additionally, they can pursue civil remedies to receive compensation for their losses. The option chosen depends on the specific case and outcomes desired.
For example, both state and federal courts hear matters involving civil and criminal law. The double jeopardy rule does not prevent civil action following criminal trials, offering victims another opportunity for justice. Proactive solutions involve restorative justice programs or economic opportunity programs, which, while different from legal actions, provide alternative means of preventing crime or addressing harm.