Which of the following is considered admissible evidence in a forensic accounting investigation?

In a forensic accounting investigation, admissible evidence must be reliable, credible, and relevant to the matter at hand. Expert opinions, documentary evidence, and witness testimony are all forms of evidence that meet these criteria.

Expert opinions are often provided by individuals with specialized knowledge in the field, lending credibility to the findings. Documentary evidence, such as financial records and contracts, provides tangible proof that can be analyzed and referenced in investigations. Witness testimony can corroborate other forms of evidence, offering personal accounts that can help establish facts relevant to the case.

In contrast, rumors from colleagues lack verifiable sources and credibility, making them inadmissible. Records that are only electronic without the corroboration of other forms of evidence do not stand alone as reliable proof. Similarly, verbal agreements without documentation cannot be substantiated, leaving them open to interpretation and debate, which undermines their admissibility in a formal investigation context.

Therefore, the combination of expert opinions, documentary evidence, and witness testimony forms the backbone of admissible evidence in a forensic accounting investigation, making this the correct choice.