Yes, but he's still replaceable. Imagine you have a biotech. The main or _the_ sr scientist there which the whole company's future depends on, gets embroiled in something like this. So they kiss the company good bye, or do they seek to rehabilitate?
In its essence, the problem will always exist. What if he/she kills someone? What if he/she has a heart attack? If your problem is depending on a single person for the company to work, then you should count on the fact that you are probably screwed.
True but deaths and incarcerations are not something a company can control (perh some places you can bribe against incarceration) but a company can control when and how they fire or not fire someone for misconduct.
As current events show, companies can't control that either. It is just a matter of realizing the obvious.
Re:Statistics, we have a problem
by HarryHirsch on Saturday December 16, 2017 @12:32AM
(#15937914)
Umberto Eco discusses that very issue in his book "How to Write A Thesis". Question: "My advisor is an arsehole." Answer: "Dude, you knew that before."
There's already a big precedent. It's Mark Hurd at HP. He was basically asked to resign for less severe incident than what these guys are facing, even though he did spectacular thing to HP stock price after years of Fiorina mismanagement.