I respectfully disagree: public shaming should be enough. After all, we have a scientific community for this exact reason: we can tell frauds, or blatant mistakes if we want to feel charitable, by examining them collectively. And that serves as an immunity system against these cases. No other vengeanceful punishment is really necessary.

Also, if we really are fond of consequences, frauds carry over the price of having to confront, for future publishing, with a scientific community that has grown a bias against the frauder; and the latter will have to regain trust if he/she wants to publish again.

The criminal charges should be for those who use unproven scientific results to endorse their own foul agenda.