(NaturalNews) The recent landmark ruling against drug giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), which as we recently reported led to a massive criminal fine of more than $3 billion and a guilty plea by the company of committing felony crimes (http://www.naturalnews.com/036499_Glaxo_whistleblower_bribery.html), was followed by an apology from GSK Vice President of Marketing "Sir" Andrew Witty for the company's "past" failures. But according to whistleblower Gregory Thorpe, the apology is meaningless, as Witty had been working for GSK during the years when the company was proven to have been engaged in illegal activity, and was more than likely involved in it.
Not only that, but Thorpe was the one punished by GSK for coming forward with the truth, a retribution that he has had to sustain for more than a decade, while Witty was recently "knighted" by the U.K. government for his supposed service to the British economy and pharmaceutical industry. If anything, Witty's ridiculous apology is nothing more than a lame attempt at shifting blame from himself to supposed "past" scapegoats, all the while claiming that GSK is now a new company that operates honestly.
Thorpe; however, says that he and Blair Hamrick were the ones that tried to change GSK for the better by coming forward with evidence that the pharmaceutical giant was engaged in a massive criminal enterprise that involved illegally marketing drugs, bribing doctors, and drugging children. And rather than change, the corrupt-to-the-core leadership team at GSK, which included Witty, put Thorpe and his family through years of hell for exposing the truth.
"[Witty] calls [the corruption] echoes of the past, another era, another company, yet he was there," wrote Thorpe in the comment section of a recent article on the GSK scandal published by the U.K.'s Yorkshire Post (YP). Like most other mainstream reports on the GSK scandal, YP glosses over Witty's potential involvement in the GSK scandal, and all the corresponding unanswered questions, and seems to accept his apology as valid and sufficient.
"Did he participate? Did he know? What did he know? Why did he not come forward? Why won't he answer these questions?" asks Thorpe about Witty's likely participation in the GSK scandal. "I blew the whistle, I was tossed out after 24 years with the company. I was terminated and retaliated against for the last 11 years ... GSK covered up their conduct, got caught, and now Witty is 'sorry'?"
"They took 11 years from me and my family suffered. I was blackballed in the pharmaceutical business. In the meantime, Witty was 'knighted.'"
$3 billion may seem like a lot, but it is nothing for a massive company like GSK
Even though it represents the largest criminal penalty in pharmaceutical history, the $3 billion fine levied against GSK is mere pocket change in the bigger picture of the company's overall financial assets and revenues. GSK openly admitted to engaging in a longstanding, organized criminal enterprise that likely cost thousands of people their lives -- does a measly $3 billion fine and a phony apology really serve justice in light of this?
According to the allegations originally filed by Thorpe and Hamrick against GSK, which the company has now pleaded guilty to, GSK's entire marketing strategy involved exploiting and defrauding government health programs; illegally promoting drugs for off-label uses that included marketing them to children; and bribing doctors to promote drugs to patients that did not need them in exchange for illicit kickbacks.
Since Witty held numerous high-level positions at GSK during the time in which the company was proven to have engaged in the most colossal criminal conspiracy yet unveiled in the pharmaceutical industry, he had to have, at the very least, been aware of what was going on at the company -- and more than likely, he was actively involved in it. But either way, Witty did not come forward and speak up about GSK's crimes, nor did he defend Thorpe and Hamrick in trying to turn the company around by exposing its corruption.
Instead, Thorpe and Hamrick made the decision to do the right thing by themselves, and consequently suffered years of torment by pharmaceutical big-wigs like Witty that continued to hide their company's evil deeds from the public. And now that the truth has been exposed in plain sight, Witty and his company are getting off scot-free with a canned apology and a relatively small, at least for GSK, financial penalty?