Since the 2008 financial crisis, there has been public outcry for the prosecution of individuals perceived to have manipulated the financial markets for their benefit and to the detriment of the public. Several years later, when news outlets began reporting on the LIBOR submission scandal, the outcry for individual prosecutions escalated, and the government launched global investigations resulting in settled cases involving large banks and multiple prosecutions of individuals who allegedly manipulated LIBOR submissions to benefit their institutions. Ultimately, the government's LIBOR prosecutions resulted in a mixed bag, with notable convictions but also acquittals in cases in the United States and the United Kingdom. The latest court battle involving an individual, United States v. Connolly, ended in a noteworthy rebuke of the government's fraud theory and serves as a reminder that conduct a prosecutor might think is "wrong" does not necessarily violate a federal fraud statute.