I think it probably looks sensible to lawyers, boards and shareholders but as the article says: <i>The decision to move forward puts HPE on a reputational tightrope. While a UK civil claim automatically ensures that the case passes to the estate of a defendant in the event of a death, the prospect of pursuing the money is likely to be deeply unpopular after the tragedy.</i><p>It's a lot of money to forgo on the basis "the great unwashed who don't own shares directly won't like it" -Their superannuation and investment funds very probably would want this money recovered, if there was a good chance of winning the case.
Does anyone have any idea why he was not convicted? With the little bit I read, it seemed like a pretty good fraud case, especially since the CFO was convicted.<p>This time it would have been much better if he had been convicted.