Roger is the CFO of a corporation and had a business dinner with some of the company's largest shareholders. Roger knowingly and intentionally started drinking a variety of alcoholic drinks and even excused himself to secretly snort cocaine in the men's room. By the end of the evening, he obviously intoxicated. His dinner companions kept buying more rounds of drinks, and Roger needed no urging to continue drinking. By dessert, he was obviously extremely intoxicated. At that point, his companions asked him to sign a variety of documents, which he did not read due to his condition. The documents turned out to be falsified financial statements, which were then supplied to the accountants who were auditing the company. Is Roger guilty of criminal fraud?

No, he is not guilty of criminal fraud because of

Explanation:

Roger is the CFO of a corporation and had a business dinner with some of the company's largest shareholders. Roger knowingly and intentionally started drinking a variety of alcoholic drinks and even excused himself to secretly snort cocaine in the men's room. By the end of the evening, he obviously intoxicated. His dinner companions kept buying more rounds of drinks, and Roger needed no urging to continue drinking. By dessert, he was obviously extremely intoxicated. At that point, his companions asked him to sign a variety of documents, which he did not read due to his condition. The documents turned out to be falsified financial statements, which were then supplied to the accountants who were auditing the company. Is Roger guilty of criminal fraud?

No,he is not guilty of criminal fraud  because he was  intoxicated, he likely could not have formed the required mens rea and would not be guilty of criminal fraud .If voluntarily intoxicated to the point that criminal intent cannot be realized or formed, a defendant would not be guilty

can you explain it better

answer; consonant;