I watched a bit on the 7:30 report I think it was on an enquiry into the commonwealth bank. The bank had released a statement that some of their employees had acted 'inappropriately'
The lead of the enquiry sort of went on to enouciate on whether that was at all the right word for what he said was flat out fraud. He gave the example of when his three year old daughter draws on wall, that's inappropriate.
With a poker face the person from the bank says they believe it was behaviour that was not appropriate.
What's the point of enquiries which make appeals to the heart?
These guys are ruthless, having sealed away their hearts in leaden jars years ago like some kind of liche.
If it were a game, it's like asking someone if they are bluffing - that can only work if they aren't good at bluffing!
Is this really how we investigate the cold, calculating mega corporations? With people who really think they can activate the guilt in one of these bank guys?
You're basically dealing with robots. And unless the legal system gives you any capacity to punish them further for showing how utterly ruthless and remorseless they are about just calling fraud an 'impropriety', there is no room for an appeal to the heart.
An appeal to the heart is something you use when your three year old daughter draws on the wall.