I'm not sure those are instances of executives being held to account for harm to the public as much as they're instances of people being punished for stealing money from the wealthy.
Don't most instances of corporate malfeasance result in "stealing money from the wealthy"? If you do a bad, try to cover it up, and then try to raise money from investors, that's basically stealing money from them.
My point is that it seems that the only circumstances that lead to corporate decision makers being held to account for wrongdoing is if someone can link their wrongdoing to a financial fraud.