Students in a Fraud Examination and Forensic Accounting course evaluate a real-life situation to determine compliance with (violation of) the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct (Code). More specifically, you will evaluate Cynthia's position as she faced requests from her client. Cynthia, a CPA, faced several challenges: accepting her client's representations (which she did not whole-heartedly believe) or call him a "liar." She faced big decisions regarding requests from a substantial tax client, named Paul, and his associate, Rick. Paul had been with her firm for almost two decades, but she had only recently taken on the lead accountant position on Paul's personal and business tax returns. The prior lead accountant, Philip, had just recently retired. In addition to Paul's long-standing client status, Paul provided her firm with large revenues, having reported an average income of nearly $3.5 million over the prior three years. Paul provided political lobbying and consulting activities, both at home in the United States and abroad; although, Paul primarily provided consulting and lobbying services to individuals and governments outside of the United States. Paul made several requests of Cynthia, his tax accountant, during the years 2014 and 2016. Two years later, she found herself in a federal district court, testifying at Paul's trial. However, she did not testify on his behalf. Would Cynthia have made different decisions if she had consulted with and followed the Code?