we live in a society. a society as a group of humans living together and cooperating collectively through group efforts and mutual agreement to behave according to norms. the explicit rules of law, such as they exist, are not the things that make society work. what the rules provide is the understanding that the rule of law protects people from those who would violate norms, and punishes them when they do anyways in order to deter would be miscreants. these explicit rules justify and rationalize the punishments we inflict on people who violate norms. the sign on the highway says 100mph, but everyone goes 110. clearly they are breaking the rules and risk facing legal consequences, but almost everyone does anyways. this is because the rule doesn't exist to stop you from driving above 100, but to provide a pretext to stop you if you drive dangerously. that cops might pull you over even if you are driving safely is an inefficiency in the system. so it is with killing. it is not illegal to kill someone. it is illegal to kill someone without justification. personally, the ghoul in question deserved to die, and i hope the perp gets away clean. he had justification. given the ceos actions, the killer had it. there was no way for this ceo to be brought to justice through the formal legal system. he did not break the law. however, he violated norms of decency and honesty to such a degree and caused so much damage that he deserved death.  during the great famine of ireland, the landlords in ireland lobbied and got passed a law that allowed them to evict their tenant farmers. they immediately got the local constable to come by and oversee as they threw the poor wretches off their land and left them to starve. a couple of them were murdered in vengeance by the very people they'd left to die. scared, some lords in england fearfully petitioned for justice, and were rebuffed. if they weren't killing off the tenant farmers on their land, what had they to fear?
Canada