When proving a suspect's illicit income circumstantially, which tracing method is most effective for funds spent on non-asset items?

The expenditures method is the most effective tracing technique for proving a suspect's illicit income spent on non-asset items because it focuses directly on the actual expenses incurred by the individual. This method involves tracking the overall expenditures to demonstrate that the individual has spent money beyond what would be expected based on their known legitimate income sources.

By concentrating on the money that has left the suspect’s hands for consumption rather than investments, the expenditures method allows investigators to build a compelling case that the suspect's spending habits reveal an income level that does not align with their reported earnings. This is particularly useful in cases where illicit income is used for everyday living expenses rather than for the purchase of physical assets.

In contrast, while methods like the income correlation, asset, and bank deposits methods may provide useful insights, they have particular limitations when it comes to tracing incomes intended for non-asset expenditures. The income correlation method compares reported income against lifestyle indicators, but may not reveal the direct link between illicit income and actual spending. The asset method focuses on the acquisition of assets, which doesn't apply to non-asset consumption. The bank deposits method analyzes funds deposited into bank accounts, which may obscure whether those funds were used for personal expenditures or represent legitimate income.

Overall, the expenditures