4 ms·
The closest general-purpose crime I can think of would be some variation of fraud. Except that to be criminally fraudulent, you have to meet the requirement of
by jcranmer 5y ago
The closest general-purpose crime I can think of would be some variation of fraud. Except that to be criminally fraudulent, you have to meet the requirement of knowingly making false statements of fact. That's quite difficult for the prosecution to prove in a criminal trial, especially given that the bar is to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt (although I doubt that juries actually adhere to that standard in practice). And honestly, I'm not sure I even believe it to be true--a lot of the failures (especially by the time we're talking CEO-level here) feel a lot more like plain hubris rather than specific fraud.
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y agoHow wasn't this blatantly securities fraud? That's already a crime. And they're already supposed to be accountable for that.
- jcranmer 5y agoAgain, securities fraud has a pesky knowingly requirement. To my understanding, in most cases, the sellers themselves believed the securities to be far less risky than they actually were.