It's not a particularly good story, but I wish people would stop with the conspiratorial thinking. There is no evidence that the NYT is "in bed" with the guy or trying to help him -- and no reason to believe it would be in their interest to do that for him.

Why would they want to help him? Do you think he is bribing them with his worthless imaginary money? How does the NYT benefit from defending someone who has destroyed his own reputation and lost billions of dollars of customer money?

Is it possible the entire thing was a Madoff-style fraud from the beginning? Yes, but that is not the only possibility. No charges have been filed, and all the people who think he should be thrown in jail never mention what laws they think he broke. It's not illegal to be an incompetent failure, and fraud has a specific definition that requires intent and does not cover all instances of simply lying.

If the NYT had written an article accusing the guy of crimes, they wouldn't have a basis for doing so. Not yet, anyway. Maybe actual criminal lawbreaking will be discovered, but right now, there is no proof. Should newspapers be accusing people of crimes without proof?

People need to put down the pitchforks and torches and wait for the full truth to come out. It's going to take a while.