The enforcement and form of securities laws is beyond me, but I think Ben’s point is that Michelle went to prison for a crime she didn’t know she was committing and had checked [citation needed] with PwC. I agree it’s not arbitrary, but it does seem a bit unfair.
> I think Ben’s point is that Michelle went to prison for a crime she didn’t know she was committing and had checked [citation needed] with PwC.
The article is written that way, but that view contradicts all the facts. As summarized in the other comments:
- Really large numbers of executives were guilty of the same conduct described in the article. They didn't go to jail.
- Michelle was not charged with anything related to the conduct described in the article. She was charged with evading her personal taxes.
It seems unlikely that she had PwC audit her personal taxes. So the main point of the article seems to be that Ben Horowitz wrote it without bothering to learn what had happened.
