I think a lot of us look at the Temecula fraud case like the Courts look company management in a hostile work environment & sexual harassment case. The operative ruling is “known” or “should have known”…
Similarly to corporate crime, SOX was instigated to eliminate CEOs claming “not to have known”. CEO were experts at insulating themselves from information so that they didn’t officially know of any bending of the rules.
Yes, we realize there is much blatant crime in the final execution of the gambit by the ring-leaders. However, many of us see a situation where the ‘victims’ “should have known” it was illegitimate and thus appear to be willing co-conspirators ready to go along as long as they thought they were going to get theirs that didn’t cry fowl until they got stung.
