4 ms·
It perhaps was stupid, but you forget that the burden of proof is the other way around. I was under the impression C-suites and directors had to file with the
by thephyber 9y ago
It perhaps was stupid, but you forget that the burden of proof is the other way around.
I was under the impression C-suites and directors had to file with the SEC in order to sell stock. I'd wager they did and that's how Bloomberg found out about it.
- scottlamb 9y agoThe burden of proof for criminal charges is the other way around. I can think of a few ways he could "in a world of hurt" without being found guilty of criminal charges; in fact without any formal burden of proof: * A trial or even just discovery for a trial and having to pay lawyers more than he gained from selling this stock. * Angry shareholders or even board members could demand consequences such as docked pay or termination. * Negative media attention such as this article.