This question was closed for the reason of legal questions, however no legal question was asked here.
The original title was "Ethical obligation after finding fraudulent applicant?"
Nowhere in the question was any legal conundrum introduced, it was not until the comments started piling up that the question started gathering close votes, and the change of title finished it IMO.
Again, the question was simply:
Beyond simply declining to hire the candidate, does Acme have any further ethical responsibilities?
There is no actual or implied legal issue here.
EDITED TO ADD:
The OP rolled back the edit and explicitly gave as his reason that the change of title changed the intent of his post.
Also, this is another case of comments changing the perception people have of the question.