Certainly not arguing with any of your points; I'm saying the things that happened could rightly be construed by investors as types of failure (e.g., "Citigroup wrote-off the entire fund") which is one of the reasons the law might apply. I'm talking about perception from a particular perspective, not the ethics.
I understand what you mean, and agree to a very large extent with the that line of thought. My concerns with Pandit are not so much on failure, but fraud and mismanagement.
