[seibelj]

It’s one thing to fire the exec team. It’s another to charge them with criminal responsibility, especially when the shareholders will ultimately fund their defense one way or another. I don’t think it would be proven.

My comment was a broader point about why corporations never seem to have employees get charged. It’s because they usually aren’t liable and won’t get convicted by a jury, and the government subpoenas all the records and determined it won’t fly.

If you disagree with my assessment, you must think there is a conspiracy in which government lawyers collude with corporate leaders to protect them. That’s a very strong conspiracy. I’m not saying you are wrong, but recognize what you are asserting.

[snovv_crash]

Professional engineers can be held criminally responsible if a building they sign off on fails. Chartered accountants can be held criminally liable if they sign off on fudged books. I don't see why an executive can't be held responsible for creating a culture under which illegal activity is the only viable option for their employees.

[Beldin]

> It’s one thing to fire the exec team. It’s another to charge them with criminal responsibility

What is their role, their contribution to the company, if not "taking responsibility"?

And if that is not part of their task, how much cheaper can this role be fulfilled with sufficient impact by someone else?