Probably observation bias. Stanford is a big target that sticks out. Corruption is a part of all institutions; it is fundamentally inevitable.

Probably more so that Stanford's meteoric rise in prestige and social capital that it attracts a number of affluent, well-connected, ambitious types who are willing to set aside morality and used to getting their way. I highly, highly doubt Stanford educates the number of future scammers (Do Kwon, Holmes, etc) who matriculated there to conduct fraud, nor that they're representative of the institution at large.

Perhaps a factor is that somebody bothered to check. Who knows what is going on elsewhere.

Isn’t Stanford also the university where a lawyer professor was very misandrist and Stanford didn’t looked into it?

Don’t forget Theranos.