Even if that's true, and I think it's important to note there's no known evidence for it, being asked to commit a crime doesn't normally diminish your culpability for it. If your boss tells you to open a fake account, you're obligated to say no, just as you would if your boss told you to go punch someone or steal their wallet.
On the other hand, under the UCMJ generally subordinates that are forced into compliance with unlawful orders are not punished anywhere near as harshly as the superior officers that cause the situations.
Not that any institution gets it right or is spotlessly incorruptible, but the general direction of UCMJ actions is the good of the service, not just being punitive.
That principle seems to have been followed here. The individual fraudsters were just fired, although some reports have indicated there’s a black mark on their record; the CEO was fired, paid 17 million dollars, and is banned from ever working for a bank in the future. (And he’s not even accused of having ordered the fraud, just of not doing enough to stop it.)
I think you left off your sarcasm tag. Getting > 0 dollars as a consequence of encouraging and abetting multiple scandals worth of malpractice is NOT what I meant.
While rank and file employees who complied were and should have been fired, his punishment should have been far more severe, at least forfeiting every dollar of compensation and realistically serving time for fraud.
