Try to reconcile this:
“Steve Jobs, chief executive of Apple, was warned in 2001 about the accounting implications of backdating stock options for top executives at the company, Apple’s former chief financial officer said on Tuesday.
The statement by Fred Anderson, who on Tuesday agreed to pay $3.5m to settle backdating charges with the Securities and Exchange Commission, raises fresh questions about the role played by Mr. Jobs in improper backdating at the company.”
“…the SEC said it would not take any action against Apple itself. The regulator on Tuesday said its decision was due in part to the company’s ”swift, extensive and extraordinary cooperation” in the government’s investigation. However, fraud charges were filed against Nancy Heinen, the company’s former general counsel.
While Tuesday’s events appear to signal that the enforcement agencies do not have evidence to pursue an immediate case against Mr Jobs, his standing as the most prominent executive to be drawn into the options backdating scandal that has engulfed more than 200 US companies has guaranteed close scrutiny of his role.”
When was the last time in recent memory that a corporate scandal led to very serious charges being brought against the CFO and General Counsel, but not against the CEO? Was the guy not showing up to work?
It’s curious that a former Apple CFO pointing fingers isn’t sufficient for the Securities Exchange Commission to proceed against Steve Jobs. Is this fellow somehow less credible than David Radler, for example? Had Conrad Black been a Silicon Valley icon, and not an English Lord, would he be on trial today in Chicago?