Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> You can find who is responsible legally but you’ll never grab the people who profit from the wrong culture they established that incentivize bad behaviors and punish employees that are just here to do their job.

Sure you can: if you have accounting fraud the CFO is liable, and the only question is whether it’s for deliberate fraud or negligence but in either case the buck stops at the top. The reason why such charges are uncommon is because those people tend to be politically well-connected, not because it’s impossible to come up with a regulatory solution.




Negligence isn't enough for most crimes. There is a Mens Rea test which requires deliberate illegal action or gross negligence.

Lots of these aren't "person up top said to cheat" but usually "person up top has unreasonable requirements".

Can you really go after someone who was pig headed and expected the impossible because their subordinates cheated?

In contrast civil penalties are appropriate here, just need to adjust the amount to discourage the behavior.


That’s why we have different crimes. If your business sells unsafe food, you don’t get off unscathed if they can’t prove that you intentionally poisoned the victims. If nothing else, any officer of the company who claims to have no idea what the people under them are doing should be worried about reconciling that with their fiduciary duties – it’s possible that they could be carefully scammed, of course, but that still requires them to show that their controls met a minimum level which seems infeasible in many cases.


Don't listen to the internet...

The defense isn't "we had no idea about anything" it is "here is the mountain of evidence that we had that shows everything was fine".

In this case those above likely have similar evidence to the regulators. Passing tests.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: