3 ms·
It really is NOT. From what I've read prosecutors care a lot about their "success rate". I think the consensus here is Equifax hired this guy to take the blame
by mcny 9y ago
It really is NOT. From what I've read prosecutors care a lot about their "success rate".
I think the consensus here is Equifax hired this guy to take the blame pretty much. That's why we call him the fall guy.
Look at Wells Fargo. Or even HSBC. Apparently, even Toyota tried to cover up its sticky accelerator? Don't forget about VW.
I think when something like this happens the CEO and the board must go to prison even if there is no direct evidence. You must take responsibility for the actions of your reports. I can't see things improving any other way.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- djrogers 9y ago> I think the consensus here is Equifax hired this guy to take the blame pretty much. What are you on about? Your theory is that Equifax execs presciently knew there would be a breach, and that they’d want to engage in insider trading, so they hired this guy and waited until the breach then told him to break the law too so he could ‘take he fall’?