Nonsense, nothing was “stolen” and if that were the case BOTH Woodford and the trustee of his fund would have sought any such “stollen” funds back. Instead, despite claims otherwise by fudsters, he, while having a fiduciary duty to his shareholders, held onto shares until the end of his fund. If he had felt otherwise he’d have had a duty to SELL. Failing in one’s fiduciary duty is a serious issue, and there is also no suggestion that he failed there either.
Just mud slinging.