What are the arguments for and against holding corporate executives responsible for corporate crime?

White collar crime is subject to various means of formal (legal) and informal social control. A look at contemporary legislative lawmaking on white collar crime reveals both the complexity of the lawmaking process and the importance the power exercised by special interest groups in shaping both the content and the effectiveness of laws. Much public commentary has asserted or implied that the American criminal-justice system unjustly privileges individuals who commit crimes in corporations and financial markets. ● What are the arguments for and against holding corporate executives responsible for corporate crime? ● Should corporate executives be held responsible for crimes committed by employees without their knowledge, but on behalf of the company? ● Should corporate executives be held responsible for crimes committed by employees because of pressures the executives have placed on them? Why or why not? You do not need an abstract, cover page or anything other than a 500 word response and 2 or more references.