4 ms·
Prosecuting someone for a crime like that is tough you have to prove out of the whole company that the people you're prosecuting actually committed the crime. T
by rtkwe 8y ago
Prosecuting someone for a crime like that is tough you have to prove out of the whole company that the people you're prosecuting actually committed the crime. That's hard because the nature of corporations is to diffuse responsibility and decision making.
- mtgx 8y agoBS. European countries have prosecuted banking crime just fine. Plus, we have Eric Holder on the record for saying he wouldn't go after bank executives because it could "hurt the economy", a reason I rank right up there with "terrorists attacked us for our freedoms."
- qaq 8y agoHmm care to show high level execs of say HSBC being prosecuted for money laundering?
- oldgradstudent 8y agoThey could have treated it just as any other type of organized crime. Start at the bottom and go up the chain of command.
- pas 8y agoThere is a long list of "reporting requirements" for financial institutions, and a lot of these is about responsibility. Group heads have to sign for their group, department leads for their department, branch managers for their branch, etc. And the CEO of course is responsible for all the branches / departments. This makes it possible to make a case out of ignoring warning signs, ignoring possible whistleblowers about illegal conduct, etc. Usually the Oversight Authority should be able to set at least some rules of these reports to help them set up the right responsibility (and thus incentive) structure (both for prevention and for whistleblowing).