If the procedures are good then the organization must be in control. For high risk areas the usage of separation of duties and monitoring controls are a major component. This is based upon the premise that 1 out of every 2 people is honest. This can be contrasted with defining risk in terms of trust which is more of a feeling than a fact. This has proved to be a slippery slope when viewed in retrospect.
Frauds have a high profile aspect.
The heart of the matter for recognizing trust and integrity effect on internal control is about developing and maintaining an ethical organizational culture which is intolerant to fraud, waste and abuse. And the definition of intolerant implicitly means that every employee will report any and all suspected instances of fraud and misconduct. Management also needs to define a business ethics which supports good management practices, not just written documents distributed to employees when they first begin work for the organization, but repeated reinforcement of the commitment backed with action applied uniformly. This helps define whether an organization consistently will do the right thing. An organization might have written codes of conduct and other value defining type documents but that does not guarantee whether they are actually followed consistently.