I tend to favor Velasquez's position over Moore's. But even with Velasquez's theory there is a problem. That is, what if the damage done is so great, the individual criminals have not got enough worldly wealth to drawn from, to pay for the damages? I favor a combination of holding the individual accountable first, and then the corporation. When an individual has been found guilty with no reasonable doubt, his assets should be liquidated and confiscated to pay for his crimes. When his or her individual asset base has been depleted and no further costs can be recovered, then the assets of the corporation should become eligible as a means to pay any liability yet due. I think the individual, as Velasquez argues, should ultimately become responsible for their actions to thwart future criminal behavior. Individuals as a group do make up a corporation. By their actions, intentions, and judgements they make the corporation what it is. This being so, they, should be held responsible for their own wrong doing, along with the corporation of their creation.…
