Final answer:
Fraud victims can prosecute in a criminal court, pursue civil litigation, or take no action after obtaining sufficient evidence. Two out of these three options are correct, which includes criminal prosecution and civil litigation.
Step-by-step explanation:
Victims of fraud have a couple of options to consider after gathering sufficient evidence. Firstly, they can prosecute the perpetrator in a criminal court. In such a case, the government would charge the person with a crime, and the standards for proving guilt are high, requiring proof 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Alternatively, victims may choose to pursue civil litigation.
In this scenario, the victim can sue for damages, and the standard of proof is the 'preponderance of the evidence', which is a lower threshold than in criminal cases. Lastly, they may decide to take no action at all. When considering the options provided, 'd) two of the above' is the correct answer since victims can either pursue legal action through criminal or civil courts or not pursue any action.