When interviewing a fraud suspect, which response indicates the suspect may be guilty?

The response that indicates a suspect may be guilty is one that suggests a deflection of responsibility or an attempt to shift blame away from themselves. When a suspect states, "It could have been anybody," they are avoiding admitting any personal involvement or knowledge of the situation. This vague assertion implies a lack of accountability and can indicate an attempt to distance themselves from the wrongdoing.

In contrast, other responses may not carry the same implication of guilt. For instance, saying, "It could be Green, but I'm not sure," does not directly deny involvement and leaves room for uncertainty. The phrase "It wasn't me, that's for sure," while assertive, can sometimes be a defensive reaction that doesn’t inherently imply guilt or innocence but might suggest panic or anxiety. Lastly, the statement "It wasn't anyone I work with" can imply awareness of the immediate environment but does not directly incriminate or exonerate the speaker.

Thus, the response that broadly casts doubt on others without taking any responsibility, such as suggesting that "it could have been anybody," reflects a potential attempt to evade accountability, marking it as suspicious and indicating possible guilt.